A decision has finally been made regarding whether or not President Trump's business conflicts violate the Constitution. Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge George Daniels of New York ruled that “restaurant workers, a hotel event booker, and a watchdog group” cannot sue the president and said “it was too soon for the lawsuit to be considered by the courts, particularly because Congress had not considered the issue.”For those who don't know, a lawsuit was filed earlier this year alleging that President Trump's “vast, complicated, and secret business interests were creating conflicts of interest.” In addition, it also claimed “the business ties violated the Constitution’s ban against taking foreign gifts and money without Congress’ permission, including for hotel stays or office leases.”In true Trump fashion, the president denounced the lawsuit, saying it was “totally without merit.” Aides close to him also “dismissed it as politically motivated.” The Justice Department even backed up the president, with some of its lawyers arguing that the “plaintiffs did not suffer in any way and had no standing to sue, and that it is unconstitutional to sue the president in his official capacity.”

President Trump; Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais, https://www.ap.org/en-us/

But why was the lawsuit filed in the first place, and who filed it? For starters, it was originally filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, and was “later joined by Restaurant Opportunities Centers United Inc. and two individuals in the hotel industry.” Once filed, the lawsuit “cited the little-known domestic and foreign emoluments clauses of the U.S. Constitution” and pointed to examples to back up the case, such as the fact that “Trump has made appearances at his resorts, golf clubs and a hotel in Washington frequently since he was sworn in as president in January.”In response to the recent ruling, Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics said:“While today’s ruling is a setback, we will not walk away from this serious and ongoing constitutional violation. The Constitution is explicit on these issues, and the president is clearly in violation. Our legal team is weighing its options and will soon lay out our decisions on how to proceed.”So why did Daniels rule the way he did? According to his ruling, “the intended purpose of the foreign emoluments clause was to prevent official corruption and foreign influence.” He added that “the purpose of the domestic emoluments clause was to ensure presidential independence” and noted that “with Congressional consent, the Constitution allows federal officials to accept foreign gifts and emoluments regardless of its effect on competition.” Additionally, he wrote:“There is simply no basis to conclude that the hospitality plaintiffs’ alleged competitive injury falls within the zone of interests that the Emoluments Clauses sought to protect.”

Sources:

Judge tosses out lawsuit against Trump over business tiesJudge throws out ethics case against President Trump