Could Trump be impeached?
No more than a few days into his term as President of the United States of America, Trump has found himself not just in the centre of the controversy that's always part of his life due to his everyday outrageous statements, but somewhat submerged in legal hot water.
Trump is seemingly poised to commit multiple and ongoing constitutional violations because of his business interests, which represent a serious conflict of interest- or at least that's what CREW is suggesting. A US watchdog group, CREW, which stands for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York first thing on Monday morning.
CREW, which includes prominent constitutional scholars, Supreme Court litigators and White House ethics lawyers, are arguing that Trump is in breach of a provision of the Constitution known as the Emoluments Clause, which bans payments made from foreign powers to a presiding President.
The group is being represented in part by two former White House chief ethics lawyers: Norman Eisen, who advised Barack Obama, and Richard Painter, who worked under George W. Bush. The two, along with many other people of influence, previously advised Trump that he'd need to fully divest from his business interests if he became President by ceding ownership or using blind trusts. Supposedly handing over control to his son is not enough.
Some of the monetary exchanges being challenged are payments from foreign government-owned tenants at Trump Tower in New York, which include The Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China. The lawsuit will also argue that Trump's "The Apprentice" TV show poses a risk due to the fact that government-owned stations in the UK and Vietnam pay for broadcast rights to the show.
India, Indonesia and Turkey are among the other countries with which Trump's companies allegedly do or plan to do business, and Trump had been trying to do business with Russia for at least three decades according to the filed complaint. Additionally, payments for a Washington hotel booking next month by the Embassy of Kuwait are being brought into question.
The language in the Emoluments Clause has been disputed by legal experts for a long time and opinions on the CREW lawsuit are divided, with many experts predicting that the legal challenge will fail. Before they get anywhere, CREW have to show they have standing to sue, by proving they have been "significantly injured" by having to divert resources to the lawsuit. The group is saying they have had to redirect significant time, money and manpower from other work in order to monitor Trump- for example finding time to respond to hundreds of questions from the Media about Trump's businesses and the potential implications of him maintaining some level of control over them whilst in office.
Whether or not the suit is successful it's surely a hint of things to come, and it's certainly worrying when there is such a level of concern over anyone in public office, let alone a US President. Trump of course has responded by saying the challenge is "without merit". His son has given a statement to say that they have gone well beyond the minimum recommended measures required to separate the Trump companies from the President and ensure complete compliance with the Constitution, including ensuring all profits are donated directly to the Treasury.
There are rumours that CREW and other legal groups already have further complaints and suits stacked up and ready to file when the time is right. It's been suggested that if this first suit fails the next step will be to sue on behalf of a hotel that's in direct competition with one of Trump's and is losing business due to the fact that Trump is president.
It's great to see people advocating justice for all and holding even the senior-most politicians in the world to account, and with the level of control the Republicans now have over the US suits like these are one of the few ways liberal organisations now have to challenge the administration. However if the current anti-Trump trends continue it will reach a point of counter-productivity and I hope that this and any future legal proceedings brought against Trump are done so in the vein of genuine justice, not just to cause upset to a man that the complainant doesn't like.
