Appeals court agrees to hear case involving Trump DC hotel

US Legal News

A federal appeals court agreed Thursday to take up a case accusing Donald Trump of profiting off the presidency in violation of the U.S. Constitution, giving the president's legal team its first major victory in the case.

The order issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, hits the pause button on the ongoing federal court case in Maryland before deadlines to respond to subpoenas issued earlier this month seeking tax returns, receipts and other records from 13 Trump businesses and other entities.

It came just three days after Justice Department lawyers filed papers seeking a writ of mandamus appeal, criticizing U.S. District Judge Peter J. Messitte and arguing that that the "intrusive" discovery that has already begun would distract the president from his performance of his constitutional duties and could cause separation of powers concerns.

For Justice to succeed at the appeals level, they must meet a demanding standard that would partly rest on showing Messitte's decisions to be clearly wrong.

The lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia alleges that because Trump has not divested himself of his business holdings, foreign and domestic government spending at Trump's Washington hotel amounts to gifts to the president in violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause.

Oral arguments before the three-judge appeals court are scheduled for March, delaying what had been a brisk discovery schedule set in the district court by several months. The order also notes that lawyers should be prepared to also address substantive issues such as whether the plaintiffs in the case can even sue and, if victorious, compel the president to stop violating the Constitution.

Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly Laco told The Associated Press the "DOJ is pleased" by the order.

Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh and D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine issued a joint statement calling the decision merely "a procedural one" and "not a ruling on the merits of our historic lawsuit against President Trump."

"We firmly believe that the federal district court got it right when it allowed us to move forward with this action and discovery. We look forward to defending our position before the court and continuing our efforts to stop President Trump from violating the Constitution by using his office for profit," they said.

Related listings

  • Chinese executive facing US extradition appears in court

    Chinese executive facing US extradition appears in court

    US Legal News 12/14/2018

    A Canadian prosecutor urged a Vancouver court to deny bail to a Chinese executive at the heart of a case that is shaking up U.S.-China relations and worrying global financial markets.Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of telecommunications gia...

  • Court deadlines set stage for more Russia probe details

    Court deadlines set stage for more Russia probe details

    US Legal News 12/12/2018

    Robert Mueller is set to reveal more details about his Russia investigation on Friday as he faces court deadlines in the cases of two men who worked closely with President Donald Trump.The special counsel and federal prosecutors in New York are filin...

  • Justice Beth Clement leading Supreme Court race

    Justice Beth Clement leading Supreme Court race

    US Legal News 11/07/2018

    Michigan Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Clement is leading a six-candidate field for two seats on the state's highest court. Nearly 95 percent of votes have been counted. The top two finishers get black robes.Justice Kurtis Wilder and appellate lawy...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New Rochelle Accidents Attorneys at Kommer Bave & Ollman LLP are specializing in personal injury claims. >> read
Santa Ana, CA Workers' Compensation Lawyers We are one of Orange County’s leading Workers’ Compensation firms. >> read