Judge hears claims in case against Trump

Lawyers for Maryland and the District of Columbia accused President Trump in federal court Monday of “profiting on an unprecedented scale” from foreign government interests using his Washington hotel, but a Justice Department lawyer insisted Trump isn’t breaking the law because he provided no favors in return.

At issue is the Constitution’s “emoluments” clause, which bans federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval. The plaintiffs argue Trump’s hotel, which has become a magnet for foreign governments, harms area businesses because of the president’s financial ties to its operations.

U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte peppered lawyers for both sides over their arguments Monday, and had a particularly pointed exchange over Justice Department lawyer Brett Shumate’s view that emoluments required a clear, provable “quid pro quo” — an exchange for an official action.

Trump administration lawyers have argued that earnings from such business activity, including hotel room stays, don’t qualify as emoluments. Lawyers for Maryland and D.C. maintain that no actual influence is necessary to establish an emoluments clause violation.

So far in Trump’s presidency, his hotel, which is in a former post office just steps from the White House, has become a popular meeting place for groups tied to foreign governments, including Kuwait, Bahrain, Turkey, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.

Messitte said he planned to rule by the end of July on whether to allow the case to go forward. If he does, plaintiffs say they plan to advance quickly to “broad” discovery, aiming to collect a trove of tax and financial records.