Appeals court to hear arguments in Trump hotel lawsuit

By DENISE LAVOIE
March 16, 2019

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — The outcome of a lawsuit alleging that Donald Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution by profiting off the presidency could depend largely on competing definitions of an antiquated word: emoluments.

At the center of the lawsuit is the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bans federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval.

The attorneys general of Maryland and Washington say government spending at Trump’s Washington hotel falls under a broad definition of emoluments: any profit, gain, or advantage.

Trump’s attorney’s, however, argue that the definition does not include payments for hotel stays. They argue that the emoluments clause only bars payments to the president if they’re made in connection with services he provides in his official capacity.

The debate over the narrow vs. broad definition is expected to be on display when the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals hears arguments in the case Tuesday.

-snip-