General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat Obamas Former Ethics Counsel Thinks of Trump
What Obamas Former Ethics Counsel Thinks of Trump
Spoiler: He thinks Trumps actions are illegal, and hes suing him.
By Dahlia Lithwick and Camille Mott
In late April, government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington expanded its lawsuit against President Donald Trump to include two new parties who have allegedly been harmed by Trumps continued interests in his business enterprises. On this weeks edition of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick sat down with Norm Eisen, former ethics counsel to President Obama and co-founder of CREW, to discuss the ethical issues of the Trump administrations first 100 days, why the presidents tax returns still matter, and what he believes is the single most concerning ethics violation of the new commander in chief.
On the domestic and foreign emoluments clauses and their purposes:
One anxiety was expressed in the Foreign Emoluments Clause. And that was the anxiety that a foreign government would provide cash or other benefits to an American president and would cause the American president to compromise the interests of the United States. This was not a fantasy, because it was common practice in the 18th century for foreign sovereignsthe Bourbon throne paid off King Charles, for example, and distorted British policy for decades that way, and American officials had been the targets of payments from foreign governments. So for a fledgling country, this was not an abstract, an obscure, or a remote possibility; it was a terror of the founders and the Framers, and thats why they gave us the Foreign Emoluments Clause of Article I, which provides that no presents, cash, benefits, or as they referred to them, emoluments of any kind whatever may be accepted by a president. Its very sweeping, subject only to congressional consent, which of course we dont have with Trump.
But there was another worry, and it may have been an even greater worry than the foreign emoluments. Certainly it was just as profound. And that was that a president of the United States would be paid off by the federal government to benefit it at the expense of the states, or paid off by one or more of the states to benefit them at the expense of the feds and the other states. Why were the founders and the Framers so worried about that? Because the United States was cobbled together, our federal system, by these individual state sovereigns who had a lot of sovereign authority, and there was a lot of debate about the proper balance of power among the states and between the states and the federal government. Its still a live issue today. To deal with that, in Article II of the Constitution, the founders and Framers put in a rule that the president may not accept any other compensation from the federal government or any of the states, apart from his salary. And thats the Domestic Emoluments Clause.
Those are the two concerns, and they are live concerns today. Thats why we have brought our amended complaint, which builds out the domestic emoluments issue, in addition to the foreign emoluments one (and does a bunch of other things, including adding more plaintiffs).
On current Domestic Emoluments Clause violations:
Im tremendously concerned about the many discretionary grants, payments, other benefits, permits that Mr. Trump requires for his hotels. Theres a large amount of these benefits that he gets. Often hes notoriously litigious, he fights about that, so these are flows of things of great value, in any state where he has a property. How can we be sure that hes not going to attempt to favor those properties, and the states where those properties exist, at the expense of the other states and the federal government? And there are so many of them!
Importantly, the founders didnt set up any kind of an intent test. They didnt want to get into the question of what was going on in the head of the president. They simply said, No foreign government cash or other benefits or presents, none from the federal government besides your salary, and none from the states, and hes violating it, all over the country and all over the world. So, thats why were litigating.
On whether this is an issue that the court system can even handle:
more...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/05/obama_s_former_ethics_counsel_is_suing_trump.html
Bleacher Creature
(11,258 posts)I never would have guessed that to be the case.