Tornado Alley (PROG)

[F6]

Justice Dept. Wants Lawsuit Against President Trump Thrown Out


The Trump International Hotel in Washington is just one of many properties owned by President Trump’s organization.
Al Drago/The New York Times

By SHARON LaFRANIERE
JUNE 9, 2017

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department asked a federal court late on Friday to dismiss a lawsuit that accused President Trump [ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/trump-foreign-payments-constitution-lawsuit.html ] of violating the Constitution by continuing to own and profit from his businesses, arguing in part that, even if he had broken the law, it would be up to Congress, not a federal judge, to act.

In a 70-page brief [ https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3862230-2017-6-9-350862663-Trump-Motion-to-Dismiss.html , via http://www.businessinsider.com/did-trump-violate-emoluments-clause-2017-6 ], the government also argued that the lawsuit is based on a faulty interpretation of the Constitution and that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated any revenue loss because of Mr. Trump’s business operations.

The lawsuit was filed this year in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington [ https://www.citizensforethics.org/ ], or CREW, a legal watchdog group. It is seeking a court order to force Mr. Trump to divest himself of his business holdings on the grounds that the Constitution prohibits him from accepting any economic benefit from foreign governments or from the United States government beyond his salary.

The other plaintiffs [ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/us/politics/trump-crew-lawsuit-constitution.html ] include a group that represents restaurants, the owner of a hotel and restaurant business in New York, and a woman who books hotel events in Washington.

Norman L. Eisen, the chairman of CREW, said the Justice Department’s claim that a federal court has no power to intervene — even if it finds a president’s behavior is unconstitutional — “is a remarkable assertion” that flies in the face of decades of judicial decisions.

The Justice Department’s lawyers argue that the injunction sought by the watchdog group would harm the president’s ability to perform his official duties and would ensnare him “in prolonged litigation over any number of transactions.” They contend that litigation would violate the separation of powers, which prohibits one branch of government from impairing another in carrying out its duties.

Even if the president’s continued ownership of his business is illegal, the government’s brief argued, “Congress is far better equipped than the courts” to fashion a remedy, perhaps by enacting legislation that would govern the president’s behavior.

Beyond that, the government’s lawyers contended, any injury claimed by CREW is “purely self-inflicted.” The group has alleged that it has been forced to divert its resources to challenge the president’s illegal actions. And the Justice Department said the other plaintiffs had not demonstrated any loss of business because of hotels or restaurants owned by the president’s companies.

Finally, the government contended, the Constitution does not prevent the president from profiting from commercial transactions conducted by his businesses, which Mr. Trump maintains he has kept at arm’s length. Such transactions, the brief argued, amount neither to gifts from a foreign government nor to economic benefits other than his presidential salary.

© 2017 The New York Times Company

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/us/justice-department-lawsuit-trump-business.html


*


Trump Can Accept Payments From Foreign Governments, Justice Department Argues

Trump and family at the October 2016 ribbon cutting for the Trump International Hotel in D.C.

Turkish businessman Ekim Alptekin, who paid President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn more than $500,000 in 2016 to lobby on behalf of Turkish interests, spoke at the 36th Annual Conference on U.S. Turkey Relations at the Trump International Hotel in D.C. last month.
June 10, 2017
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/doj-says-trump-can-accept-payments-from-foreign-governments.html


*


Justice Department argues it's fine for Trump to take payments from foreign governments, citing George Washington
Jun. 9, 2017
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-emoluments-foreign-government-payments-2017-6


--


White House social-media director Dan Scavino violated Hatch Act with tweet targeting GOP congressman

Dan Scavino, the White House director of social media, was reprimanded for a tweet attacking Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.).
June 9, 2017
White House social-media director Dan Scavino Jr. violated a federal law that bars public officials from using their positions for political activity when he urged President Trump's supporters to defeat a GOP congressman, the Office of Special Counsel has concluded.
As a result, Scavino was issued a warning letter and advised that additional violations of the law could result in further action, according to a June 5 letter that the office sent to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which filed a complaint about Scavino's tweet.
Scavino's April 1 message [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/04/02/white-house-social-media-director-misused-official-position-by-going-after-gop-lawmaker-ethics-experts-say/ ] called on the “#TrumpTrain” to take out Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) in an upcoming primary, referring to him as “a big liability.” Amash is a member of the House Freedom Caucus, a group that Trump had blamed at the time for derailing legislation that would have repealed parts of the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
Even though Scavino was tweeting from his personal account, his page at the time listed his official White House position and featured a photo of him inside the Oval Office.
The Office of Special Counsel concluded that his tweet violated the Hatch Act, which restricts government employees from attempting to influence an election through their official authority.
“Mr. Scavino has been advised that if in the future he engages in prohibited political activity while employed in a position covered by the Hatch Act, we will consider such activity to be a willful and knowing violation of the law, which could result in further action,” Ana Galindo-Marrone, chief of the office's Hatch Act Unit, wrote in a letter to CREW.
Federal employees who willfully violate the Hatch Act [ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/1215 ] can be removed from their positions or barred from federal employment for up to five years.
[...]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/06/09/white-house-social-media-director-dan-scavino-violated-hatch-act-with-tweet-targeting-gop-congressman/ [with comments]


*


Office Of Special Counsel: Trump’s Social Media Director Violated Hatch Act

June 9, 2017
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dan-scavino-violates-hatch-act [with embedded copy ooooooooooooooooooooo OSC letter]


*


Trump’s social media director violated the Hatch Act — but federal watchdogs let him off with a warning
The Chief of the Office of Special Counsel's Hatch Act Unit said that Dan Scavino "was recently counseled" on it
Jun 9, 2017
http://www.salon.com/2017/06/09/trumps-social-media-director-violated-the-hatch-act-but-federal-watchdogs-let-him-off-with-a-warning/ [with comments]


--


in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (other) following (the primary reference posts in this string, of which the post to which this is a reply is one, continue with the reply to that one at http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132042257 and {future} following), see also (linked in):

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128628984 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131413070 (and any future following)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131345060 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131541157 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132076345 and preceding (and any future following)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132078524 (the other current reply to the post to which this is a reply) and preceding (and any future following)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132078799 and preceding (and any future following)