Jun 132017

Two Attorneys General Lawsuit Against President Trump

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and Washington D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, allege that President Trump is violating the anti-corruption Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

Among the arguments raised in the lawsuit by the Attorney Generals:

  • The President’s continued ownership of his business empire
  • The Trump businesses’ acceptance of payments from foreign governments without the approval of Congress
  • United States government’s preferential treatment of the President’s businesses
  • Numerous appearances of the President’s use of his position for personal profit

The purpose of the Emoluments Clause is:

  • to prevent a president from exploiting the office for personal gain
  • to prevent national entities from influencing a president’s decisions in their favor by financial means
  • to prevent foreign entities from gaining a president’s favor through a direct or indirect bribe

The Two Attorneys General Lawsuit Against President Trump, the lawsuit filed by Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and Washington D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, isn’t the first or the only lawsuit targeting President Trump, several dozens of lawsuits have been filed since President Trump took office. The difference between this lawsuit and the many others is that this one is the FIRST filed by government officials. Now the case rests in the hands of a federal judge who will decide whether or not to allow the case to proceed. Should the lawsuit be allowed to proceed, the President would have to disclose his numerous business entanglements, including his businesses’ indebtedness, his personal tax returns, etc.

The significance of this lawsuit can’t be underestimated. The President of the United States should not be beholden to anyone (including his own business intersts) if he is to act in the best interest of our Country and our Country alone.
Until the President comes clean about his business, the American people can’t be certain of the actual motifs of his decisions. As it is, the President’s decisions are open to interpretations: they can be motivated by his sincere desire to “Make America Great Again” or – just as well – by his desire to improve his profit margins in a record time….

While the fate of the latest legal action is being considered, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against the President’s revised travel ban.

Anything L.A. Liberal Magazine’s Editor, E. Elrich




Comment Title
Comment Content