President Donald Trump was probably very relieved last month to have defeated the first lawsuit challenging his receipt of business profits while in office. U.S. District Court Judge George Daniels ruled that the plaintiffs “failed to show injury” directly related to the use of the president’s properties by foreign dignitaries and governments.
Judge Daniels also opined that the courts are not equipped to handle such an issue with respect to a sitting president — that Congress should handle it.
Last week, however, U.S. District Court Judge Peter Messitte made it clear that he wasn’t persuaded by any number of aspects of Daniels’s ruling. Of the prior ruling, Judge Messitte said that he thought Daniels was too quick to dismiss salient arguments that Trump’s competitors have legal standing to challenge the profits he’s making from his hotels, properties, and other business ventures… by virtue of being President of the United States.
The Maryland judge also implied that Judge Daniels had not elucidated his decision making process in a way that Messitte found satisfactory.
“He just said that in a sentence. There was no analysis at all,” Messitte said after Justice Department attorney Brett Shumate invoked Daniels’ opinion. “There’s very little analysis in his declarations. … I’m not really bound by even the logic at this point, with all respect to Judge Daniels.”
Maryland Solicitor General Steven Sullivan argued, “Our hospitality sectors cannot offer clients the the same opportunities to influence the president.”
Obviously this is precisely why the clause was put in place. Likewise, this is why presidents divest their financial holdings and place their assets into an actual blind trust — as opposed to leaving the financial babysitting to their children. Trump didn’t do this, so his private wealth is indeed being impacted by his presidency. That is a huge deal. Perhaps not for an unapologetic plutocrat — but for a sitting American president — it is without precedent.
Also per POLITICO:
“Judge Messitte also raised the fact that D.C. recently reduced the tax assessment on the Trump hotel. Shumate noted that a D.C. official was quoted as saying the decision was made on the merits, but the judge suggested D.C. lawyers are still free to argue the decision was improper or was made under pressure related to Trump being president.”
Just when most of us had settled into the idea that we’ll spend 3 more years knowing that Trump is using his presidency to increase his profit margins — and not just by tinkering with the tax code in a way that so heavily favors himself — Judge Peter Messitte just opened up the possibility that perhaps Donald Trump does actually have to follow some of the rules.