In Ruling Against Trump, Judge Defines Anticorruption Clauses in Constitution for First Time

The following article by Sharon LaFraniere was posted on the New York Times website July 25, 2018:

Trump International Hotel in Washington. “The argument is that as president he is unduly attracting business,” the judge said of President Trump. “There is some evidence of that.” Credit: Alex Brandon/Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A lawsuit accusing President Trump of violating the Constitution by maintaining a financial interest in his company’s Washington hotel cleared a critical hurdle on Wednesday when a federal judge allowed the case to move forward.

In the first judicial opinion to define how the meaning of the Constitution’s anticorruption clauses should apply to a president, Judge Peter J. Messitte of the United States District Court in Greenbelt, Md., said the framers’ language should be broadly construed as an effort to protect against influence-peddling by state and foreign governments.

He ruled that the lawsuit should proceed to the evidence-gathering stage, which could clear the way for an examination of financial records that the president has consistently refused to disclose. The Justice Department is expected to forestall that by seeking an emergency stay and appealing the ruling.

View the complete article here.