Ruling reinstates lawsuit over Trump’s hotel profits

RICHMOND, Va. — A lawsuit accusing President Trump of illegally profiting off the presidency through his luxury Washington hotel was revived Thursday by a divided federal appeals court.

The lawsuit brought by the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia alleges that Trump has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by accepting profits through foreign and domestic officials who stay at the Trump International Hotel.

The ruling from the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond could jumpstart efforts by the two jurisdictions to obtain financial records showing how much state and foreign governments have paid the Trump Organization to stay at the hotel and hold events there. A lower court judge approved more than three dozen subpoenas issued to the General Services Administration — the administrator of the lease on the hotel — and other government agencies, but the subpoenas were put on hold while Trump’s appeal was pending.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and District Attorney General Karl Racine — both Democrats — said they expect the case to return to U.S. District Court in Maryland, where a judge could lift the stay on the subpoenas. But both Frosh and Racine said they think it’s likely the Trump administration will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. A spokeswoman for the Department of Justice said the DO J is reviewing the ruling, but did not comment on whether it will seek review by the high court.

The lawsuit was filed almost three years ago. U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte refused to dismiss it, but his ruling was overturned in July by a threejudge panel of the 4th Circuit. The judges found that Maryland and the District of Columbia lacked standing to pursue their claims against the president.

But on Thursday, the panel’s ruling was overturned by the full court of 15 judges. In a 96 ruling, the court found that the threejudge panel overstepped its authority when it ordered Messitte to dismiss the lawsuit.

“We recognize that the President is no ordinary petitioner, and we accord him great deference as the head of the Executive branch. But Congress and the Supreme Court have severely limited our ability to grant the extraordinary relief the President seeks,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the majority in rejecting Trump’s request to dismiss the lawsuit.