Trump’s IRS Deal Is a Massive Test for Congress and the Courts |
Trump’s IRS Deal Is a Massive Test for Congress and the Courts
The president’s slush-fund-and-tax-penalty “settlement” is brazenly criminal. If our governing institutions can’t block it, America will officially be a banana republic.
Let’s don’t waste any time debating the legality of President Donald Trump’s IRS “settlement” (click here to read part one and here to read part two). As my colleague Matt Ford explains at length, this deal is very illegal. The only question is whether Congress and the courts can move quickly to stop Trump’s theft of $1.8 billion from the United States Treasury to reward MAGA criminals, plus several hundred million dollars more to shield Trump and his family from IRS penalties. If they can, we’re a nation of laws. If they can’t, we’re a banana republic.
The settlement is illegal mainly because it violates the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause, which states:
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Trump has, with great impunity, been violating the Constitution’s two emoluments clauses, domestic and foreign, since he first entered office in 2019. The nonprofit watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sued Trump during his first term over foreign emoluments violations concerning payments to Trump’s hotels and apartment buildings and royalties from foreign-government-owned broadcasters related to The Apprentice. But CREW said Trump’s busiinesses also likely violated the domestic emoluments clause because some of the transactions involved payments from the federal government or state governments.
CREW’s lawsuit was dismissed in district court, but CREW prevailed on appeal and the case was remanded back to the district court. Trump then appealed to the Supreme Court. By now it was September 2020. The high court waited four months and then dismissed the case as moot because Trump had lost re-election. A similar lawsuit........