CREW v. Trump

{{Short description|Lawsuit against Donald Trump concerning emoluments}} {{Use American English|date=February 2026}} {{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}} {{Infobox COA case |Litigants=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump |Court=United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit |ArgueDate=October 30, |ArgueYear=2018 |DecideDate=September 13, |DecideYear=2019 |FullName=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, Inc., Jill Phaneuf, and Eric Goode, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States of America, Defendant-Appellee. |Citations= |Prior=276 F. Supp. 3d 174 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) |Holding=Plaintiffs have standing to bring an Emoluments Clause suit against President Donald Trump.<ref name="LaFraniere"/> |Judges=Pierre N. Leval, Christopher F. Droney, John M. Walker, Jr.<ref name="LaFraniere"/> |Majority=Leval |JoinMajority=Droney |Concurrence= |JoinConcurrence= |Dissent= Walker |JoinDissent= |LawsApplied= }} '''''Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump''''' was a case brought before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-have-oversight-investigation-plans-far-beyond-russia-probe-n934206|title=House Democrats have oversight investigation plans far beyond Russia probe|website=NBC News|date=November 9, 2018 |language=en|access-date=2018-12-16}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/387996-federal-ethics-watchdog-trump-should-have-disclosed-cohen-payment/|title=Ethics watchdog: Trump should have disclosed Cohen payment last year|last=Samuels|first=Brett|date=2018-05-16|website=The Hill|language=en|access-date=2018-12-16}}</ref> watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), hotel and restaurant owner Eric Goode, an association of restaurants known as ROC United, and an Embassy Row hotel event booker named Jill Phaneuf alleged that the defendant, President Donald Trump, was in violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause, a constitutional provision that bars the president or any other federal official from taking gifts or payments from foreign governments. CREW filed its complaint on January 23, 2017, shortly after Trump was inaugurated as president. An amended complaint, adding the hotel and restaurant industry plaintiffs, was filed on April 18, 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/18/lawsuit-against-trump-over-foreign-payments-expands.html|title=Lawsuit accusing Trump of violating the Constitution just expanded|website=CNBC |date=2017-04-18|agency=Reuters|url-status=dead|archive-date=2017-04-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170421030442/http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/18/lawsuit-against-trump-over-foreign-payments-expands.html}} {{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/us/politics/trump-crew-lawsuit-constitution.html|title=Watchdog Group Expands Lawsuit Against Trump|date=2017-04-18|last1=LaFraniere|first1=Sharon|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=2017-06-11}}</ref> A second amended complaint was filed on May 10, 2017.<ref name="CREW201705">{{cite press release|author=|url=https://www.citizensforethics.org/press-release/crew-v-trump-adds-new-plaintiff/|title=CREW v. Trump Adds New Plaintiff|publisher=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington|date=2017-05-10|access-date=2017-06-10}}</ref> CREW was represented by several prominent lawyers and legal scholars in the case.<ref name="CREWvsDJTcomplaintPDF">[https://s3.amazonaws.com/storage.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/23140054/CREW-DJT-Final.pdf Complaint], ''Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington'', No. 1:17-cv-00458 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2017)</ref><ref name="FahrentholdJan22">{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/liberal-watchdog-group-sues-trump-alleging-he-violated-constitutional-ban/2017/01/22/5e8b35c2-e113-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html|title=Liberal watchdog group sues Trump, alleging he violated constitutional ban|first1=David A.|last1=Fahrenthold |first2=Jonathan |last2=O'Connell|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=January 22, 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author1=David A. Fahrenthold|author2=Jonathan O'Connell|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/what-is-the-emoluments-clause-does-it-apply-to-president-trump/2017/01/23/12aa7808-e185-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html|title=What is the 'Emoluments Clause'? Does it apply to President Trump?|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=January 23, 2017}}</ref>

U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels dismissed the case on December 21, 2017, holding that plaintiffs lacked standing.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-alleging-trump-violated-constitution/2017/12/21/31011510-e697-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html|title=Judge dismisses lawsuit alleging Trump violated Constitution|newspaper=The Washington Post |date=December 21, 2017}}</ref><ref name="OrderGrantingMotDismiss">''[https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/EmolumentsDismissal.pdf Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump]'', 17 Civ. 458 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2017).</ref> On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the dismissal, reinstated the suit, and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings.<ref name="LaFraniere">Sharon LaFraniere, [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/13/us/politics/trump-emoluments-lawsuit.html U.S. Appeals Court Reinstates Emoluments Case Against Trump], The New York Times (September 13, 2019).</ref> In January 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court instructed the lower courts to dismiss the case (and a similar case brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia) as moot, because Trump was no longer president.<ref name=Cole>{{cite news|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/25/politics/emoluments-supreme-court-donald-trump-case/index.html|title=Supreme Court dismisses emoluments cases against Trump|first1=Ariane|last1=de Vogue|first2=Devan|last2=Cole|work=CNN|date=25 January 2021}}</ref>

==Background== Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington stated that because Trump-owned buildings take in rent, room rentals and other payments from foreign governments, the president has breached the Foreign Emoluments Clause. The Constitution says that "no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under the United States, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."<ref name="FahrentholdJan22"/> The case also includes a claim under the Domestic Emoluments Clause.

An Emoluments Clause lawsuit directed at a sitting president has never been tested in court, and there is little judicial precedent in this area of constitutional law. The Clause is, however, the subject of a considerable body of precedent from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel and the Office of the Comptroller General. The plaintiffs are asking for an injunction and declaratory judgment directed at President Trump requiring that he cease violations of the Emoluments Clauses. On January 23, 2017, after the action was filed in U.S. District Court, Trump rejected the arguments underlying the lawsuit as "Without merit," and "Totally without merit" during his morning press conference at the White House.<ref>{{cite press release|url=http://www.citizensforethics.org/press-release/17451/|title=[UPDATE] CREW Sues Trump Over Emoluments |publisher=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington|date=January 23, 2017}}</ref><ref name="Riback">{{cite web|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/why-trumps-business-conflicts-cant-and-wont-just-be-swept-aside-commentary.html|title=Why Trump's business conflicts can't—and won't—just be swept aside|author=Chris Riback|date=January 23, 2017|publisher=CNBC}}</ref>

CREW is represented in the suit by "a group {{sic|comprised |hide=y|of}} former White House ethics lawyers, constitutional scholars, and Supreme Court litigators,"<ref name="Riback"/> including constitutional law professor Laurence H. Tribe of Harvard Law School; Supreme Court litigator Deepak Gupta of Gupta Wessler PLLC; Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law; Richard Painter, law professor at the University of Minnesota and chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration; and Zephyr Teachout of Fordham Law School.<ref name="CREWvsDJTcomplaintPDF"/> The United States Department of Justice represents Trump.<ref name="FahrentholdJan22"/>

==Quotes from second amended complaint== {{blockquote|Defendant has violated the Constitution since the opening moments of his presidency and is poised to do so continually for the duration of his administration. Specifically, Defendant has committed and will commit violations of both the Foreign Emoluments Clause and the Domestic Emoluments Clause, involving at least: (a) leases held by foreign-government-owned entities in New York's Trump Tower; (b) room reservations, restaurant purchases, the use of facilities, and the purchase of other services and goods by foreign governments and diplomats, state governments, and federal agencies, at Defendant's Washington, D.C. hotel and restaurant; (c) hotel stays, property leases, restaurant purchases, and other business transactions tied to foreign governments, state governments, and federal agencies at other domestic and international establishments owned, operated, or licensed by Defendant; (d) property interests or other business dealings tied to foreign governments in numerous other countries; (e) payments from foreign-government-owned broadcasters related to rebroadcasts and foreign versions of the television program "The Apprentice" and its spinoffs; and (f) continuation of the General Services Administration lease for Defendant's Washington, D.C. hotel despite Defendant's breach, and potential provision of federal tax credits in connection with the same property.<ref name="SecondAmendedComplaint">{{cite web|url=https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802.28.0.pdf|author=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington|date=2017-05-10|title=Second Amended Complaint, Docket 28}}</ref>}}

==District court proceedings== President Trump filed a motion to dismiss on June 9, 2017.<ref name="DOCKETCOPY">{{cite web|url=https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802.docket.html|access-date=2017-06-12|title=Copy of Docket}}</ref> on the grounds that the plaintiffs had no right to sue<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/09/532302106/trump-administration-calls-for-lawsuit-about-his-businesses-to-be-dismissed|title=Trump Administration Calls For Lawsuit About His Businesses To Be Dismissed|first1=Marilyn|last1=Geewax|date=2017-06-09|access-date=2017-06-10|agency=NPR}}</ref> and that the described conduct was not illegal.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-emoluments-foreign-government-payments-2017-6|title=Justice Department argues it's fine for Trump to take payments from foreign governments, citing George Washington|work=Business Insider|date=2017-06-10|access-date=2017-06-10|first1=Allan|last1=Smith}}</ref> A response to the motion to dismiss was filed on August 4, 2017, with a DOJ reply due by September 22, 2017.<ref name="ORDER47">{{Cite Pacer | plaintiff = CREW | defendant = Trump | date = 2017-07-07| case-division = 1| case-year = 2017| case-type = cv| case-sequence = 00458| case-state = ny| case-district = sd| pacer-number = 467802| title = Order| doc-number = 47| access-date = 2017-08-06}}</ref> A full answer from DOJ lawyers to the facts alleged in the complaint was due on August 11, 2017.<ref name="ORDER29">{{Cite Pacer | plaintiff = CREW | defendant = Trump | date = 2017-05-11| case-division = 1| case-year = 2017| case-type = cv| case-sequence = 00458| case-state = ny| case-district = sd| pacer-number = 467802| title = Order| doc-number = 29| access-date = 2017-06-12}}</ref> Oral arguments were expected October 18, 2017.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Beavers|first1=Olivia|title=Oral arguments this week in lawsuit against Trump over Emoluments Clause|url=https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/355532-oral-arguments-this-week-in-lawsuit-against-trump-over-emoluments/|access-date=16 October 2017|work=The Hill|date=October 15, 2017}}</ref>

On December 21, 2017, the motion to dismiss was granted; Judge George B. Daniels held that plaintiffs lacked standing.<ref name="OrderGrantingMotDismiss"/>

==Second Circuit proceedings== On February 16, 2018, the dismissal of the suit was appealed by CREW,<ref name="NoticeOfAppeal">{{cite press release |author= |title=Notice Of Appeal Filed In Emoluments Case |url=https://www.citizensforethics.org/press-release/notice-appeal-filed-emoluments-case/ |location=Washington |publisher=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington |date=2018-02-16 |access-date=2018-10-10 |archive-date=2018-10-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181011013751/https://www.citizensforethics.org/press-release/notice-appeal-filed-emoluments-case/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> primarily on an economically informed theory of emolument-related injury to competitors,<ref name="AppealBrief27">[https://s3.amazonaws.com/storage.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/25150026/2018-4-24-27-Filed-Brief.pdf Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants], filed April 24, 2018, 2d Cir. Docket 18-0474, Document 27</ref> with all briefs filed by both parties by June 27. Deepak Gupta of Gupta Wessler presented oral argument for the plaintiffs before a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit on October 30, 2018. On September 13, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York (in a 2 to 1 decision) reinstated the lawsuit and sent it back to the lower court so that the case can move forward.<ref name="LaFraniere"/> The appellate decision was critical of the July 2019 appellate decision in ''D.C. and Maryland v. Trump''.<ref>{{cite news|first1=Elie |last1=Mystal |url=https://abovethelaw.com/2019/09/emoluments-are-back-on-the-table/ |access-date=October 19, 2019 |title=Emoluments Are Back On The Table: Second Circuit reinstates emoluments lawsuit against Trump |newspaper=Above the Law|quote=The Second Circuit's opinion then goes into a point-by-point take down of the Fourth Circuit opinion.|date=September 16, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite court |litigants=Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, Inc., Jill Phaneuf, and Eric Goode v. Donald J. Trump |court=2nd Cir. |date=September 13, 2019 |url=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/50c3d9cf-26f7-4659-b876-b7acd82fb0a5/2/doc/18-474_complete_opn.pdf |pinpoint=pp.30-45 |quote=The Fourth Circuit expressed skepticism as to "why [the plaintiffs] came to the court for relief in the first place," implying that their motivation was political and that this cast doubt on the federal court's jurisdiction. While it is certainly possible that these lawsuits are fueled in part by political motivations, we do not understand the significance of that fact. But while the existence of a political motivation for a lawsuit does not supply standing, nor does it defeat standing. Whether a lawsuit has political motivations is irrelevant to these determinative issues. [citations omitted] |archive-date=September 30, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190930051518/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/50c3d9cf-26f7-4659-b876-b7acd82fb0a5/2/doc/18-474_complete_opn.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In January 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court instructed the lower courts to dismiss the case (and a similar case brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia) as moot, because Trump was no longer president.<ref name=Cole/>

On April 23, 2021, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mandate which dismissed the case.<ref>[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/20412001/Citizens_for_Responsibility_and_Ethics_in_Washington_v_Trump 17-cv-458. MANDATE of USCA.]</ref>

==References== {{Reflist|2}}

==External links== * [https://s3.amazonaws.com/storage.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/23222937/Complaint-17-458.pdf Copy of complaint filed in United States District Court] (PDF, 37 pages, 271 KB) * [https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802.28.0.pdf Copy of Second Amended Complaint filed in United States District Court] (PDF, 68 pages, 407 KB) * [https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802/gov.uscourts.nysd.467802.35.0.pdf Copy of Memorandum in support of motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim] (PDF, 70 pages, 687 KB)

Category:Donald Trump litigation Category:United States District Court for the Southern District of New York cases Category:United States Constitution Article One case law  Category:United States Constitution Article Two case law  Category:United States standing case law Category:2017 in United States case law Category:United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit cases