Skip to content

Blumenthal & Conyers Lay Out the Constitutional Case for Compelling President Trump to Obey Anti-Corruption Foreign Emoluments Clause

In the week since nearly 200 members of Congress filed a complaint to compel President Trump to comply with the Constitution, public reporting has revealed new evidence of foreign benefits

[WASHINGTON, DC] – Today, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) held a press conference to outline the Constitutional case for compelling President Trump to obtain the consent of Congress before accepting payments, benefits, or gifts from foreign states. Last week, Blumenthal and Conyers led a group of nearly 200 Members of Congress in filing a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, for President Trump’s ongoing violation of the anti-corruption Foreign Emoluments Clause.

The Foreign Emoluments Clause requires that all elected officials, including the president, seek the “consent of the Congress” before receiving any gifts, payments, or benefits from foreign governments. The Constitution’s Framers included such a requirement to protect against foreign influence on U.S. officials, and to ensure that those officials act in the national interest, instead of their own.

Blumenthal and Conyers, who are leading the legal action against President Trump, were joined at the press conference by U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), and U.S. Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Katherine Clark (D-MA), and Brad Schneider (D-IL).

Full video of the press conference is available here.

“We are joining in this action to prevent Donald Trump from thumbing his nose at the Constitution and the American people. The Constitution clearly states that no elected official - including the President - may receive gifts, payments, or benefits from foreign governments without disclosing them to Congress and seeking our consent,” Senator Blumenthal said. “The immense magnitude of President Trump's vast business empire is no excuse for his disregard of the Constitution and disrespect for the American people.”

“For generations,” Representative Conyers said, “presidents of both parties have complied with the Foreign Emoluments Clause by either divesting their business and financial holdings, or coming to Congress to seek approval prior to receiving any foreign government payment or other benefits. Our current President has done neither. This course of conduct is keeping Americans in the dark – leaving us to speculate if he’s acting on behalf of the American people or for his own financial benefit. Today’s legal action is designed to help lift our Nation out of this morass of conflicts and restore faith in our government, just as the founders intended.”

Because President Trump has refused to disclose his business dealings abroad, the full scope of his potential Constitutional violations is unknown. Independent reporting has shown that President Trump has received the following foreign emoluments during his presidency among others:

  • Payments from foreign governments housing their officials in rooms or hosting events at Trump’s Washington, D.C. hotel after Inauguration Day;
  • Entities owned by foreign states paying rent at Trump World Tower in New York City; and
  • The Chinese government granting thirty-nine trademarks to the Trump Organization.

In the week since the complaint was filed, public reporting has revealed that President Trump has received additional foreign benefits – including new trademarks in China – and is brokering business deals in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf while regional tensions escalate. While President Trump continues to accept benefits from foreign governments, Congress has no choice but to seek a remedy through the courts.

“If courts rule otherwise,” added Elizabeth Wydra, President of Constitutional Accountability Center, the public interest organization whose attorneys are representing Members of Congress in this case, “President Trump would be permitted to make government decisions subject to a glaring conflict of interest. The prospect that a president’s decisions would be influenced by foreign manipulation or his personal wealth is exactly why the nation’s Founders adopted the Foreign Emoluments Clause.”

The Constitution does not require Congress to seek information about any benefits the President may be receiving from other countries – rather, the President must come to Congress to disclose any foreign gifts or payments and to obtain permission before accepting them. Nonetheless, Members of the Senate and the House have made repeated attempts to obtain information about President Trump’s business holdings and potential conflicts of interest. These and similar inquiries to Republican Congressional leadership have gone unanswered.

The full list of plaintiffs who have joined this case is available here. A Congressional Research Service analysis of suits by members of Congress found no larger action.




Complaint, Blumenthal, Conyers, et al., vs. Trump:

List of plaintiffs:

Why Members of Congress have standing:

Emoluments 101:

Key letters from Members of Congress seeking information about President Trump’s foreign emoluments:


Maria McElwain, Office of Senator Blumenthal, (202) 224-6452,

Shadawn Reddick-Smith, Office of Representative Conyers, 202-225-6906,

Doug Pennington, Constitutional Accountability Center, 202-296-6889 x 303,