Trump Wants DC Circuit to Stop 'Distracting' Emoluments Suit
Justice Department lawyers have lost earlier bids to shut down the lawsuit, filed by U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and other Democratic senators.
July 08, 2019 at 03:22 PM
4 minute read
U.S. Justice Department lawyers will ask a federal appeals court in Washington to block a lawsuit from Democratic U.S. senators and House members that contends President Donald Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against presidents receiving gifts or payments from foreign states.
Justice Department lawyers have lost earlier bids to shut down the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by named plaintiff U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, who was joined by more than 200 other senators and members of the House. Government lawyers said Monday they intend to ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to issue an order pausing the case, or an order directing the trial judge to dismiss the complaint.
“If the district court's clearly erroneous orders are allowed to stand, this improper suit will proceed and the members will commence discovery aimed at probing the president's personal financial affairs because he holds federal office,” Justice Department lawyers said in a court filing. “Indeed, that discovery, the members acknowledge, may be directed at the president himself, 'distract[ing] [him] from the energetic performance of [his] constitutional duties.'”
DOJ lawyers said they will ask the D.C. Circuit to rule by July 22, seven days before third parties—including a number of Trump businesses—are scheduled to respond to subpoenas issued by the plaintiffs.
Justice Department lawyers argued in their court filing Monday that “any information produced through discovery would undoubtedly be publicized and used to distract and harass the president.”
At issue is U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan's ruling April 30 that said the lawmakers' complaint can proceed. Sullivan refused to dismiss claims that confront Trump's continued receipt of revenue from his private business holdings, including his hotel in downtown Washington. Last month, Sullivan, denying Trump's push to pause the proceedings, said evidence-gathering could begin June 28.
“This tremendous victory assures that President Trump will be held accountable to the Constitution and the American people—a historic triumph for legally mandated transparency,” Blumenthal said in a statement in June. “In a thoughtful, well-reasoned opinion, Judge Sullivan articulated what the law makes clear: there is absolutely no reason to delay one more day in ensuring that President Trump is held accountable for his violation of the Constitution's preeminent anti-corruption provision.”
The civil suit in Washington's federal trial court is one of several that contends Trump has violated the Constitution's “emoluments” clause, an anti-graft provision that forbids a U.S. president from profiting from public office. A federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, is weighing a similar push from the Justice Department to stop an emoluments suit from Maryland's federal trial court. The appeals court heard arguments in March.
The emoluments litigation is separate from other efforts, led by U.S. House Democrats, to force the Treasury Department and IRS to comply with the terms of a subpoena seeking copies of Trump's tax returns.
Trump also is fighting subpoenas, from various House committees, that seek financial-related information from his longtime accounting firm Mazars USA and from Deutsche Bank and Capital One. A D.C. Circuit panel on Friday—Judges Patricia Millett, David Tatel and Neomi Rao—will hear the Mazars case.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has set Aug. 23 to hear Trump's effort to block subpoenas issued to Deutsche Bank and Capital One.
The Justice Department's emoluments filing is posted below:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute read'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Ben Brafman Defending Celebrity Rabbi in Lawsuit by Miami Hotel
- 2People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
- 3How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be a Lawyer First, Foremost and Always,' Says Matthew McLaughlin of Venable
- 4Bar Report - Dec. 23
- 5Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250