Trump’s legality potentially accepting the gift of the questionable Qatar plane: experts

The expected plan of President Donald Trump to accept the gift proposed by the Qatar government of Qatar of a luxury plane, to use as a temporary air force, violates the Constitution?

Trump insists that it would not be a gift for him, but for the Pentagon, essentially avoiding the rules of the Constitution.

But Democrats and critics say it is, especially because he would be using and benefiting from the plane while he was in office, and therefore the Constitution requires the approval of the Congress, according to the “Emolument Clause.”

“This is explained as blatantly unconstitutional by our founding parents,” said Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut on the Senate’s floor. “Founding parents knew that it was bad for the members of Congress or the President to accept gifts of a foreign government.”

Some Republicans and experts also have ethics and security concerns.

ABC News communicated with experts to help explain the legal questions in question.

The ’emolument’ clause

With few details available so far about the agreement, experts tell ABC News that it is too early to know if the proposed gift would violate the unseeding limits posed by the “Emolument clause” of the Constitution or other federal regulations.

According to the foreign emolument clause of article I that governs the President, “no person who has any profits or trust under them, without the consent of the Congress, will accept … any present, emolument, office or title, of any kind, of any king, prince or foreign state.”

Trump and the Department of Justice have affirmed that the $ 400 million plane, after being donated to the Department of Defense, would be modernized to use as Air Force One for the rest of his mandate. The administration has not published its estimate on the modernization of the plane.

“It is a gift from a nation, Qatar, which we have defended successfully for many years. It will be used by our government as a temporary air force, until the moment our new boeings, which arrive very late to delivery,” Trump said in a publication of social networks on Tuesday night defending the idea.

The sources told ABC News that the plane would be dismantled and delivered to the Trump presidential library after the position is left, although Trump and his officials have not publicly confirmed it.

The attorney general Pam Bondi and the main lawyer of the White House of Trump, David Warrington, concluded that it would be “legally permissible” that the donation of the aircraft is conditioned when transferring its property to the Trump presidential library before the end of its mandate, according to sources familiar with its determination.

Bondi provided a legal memo aimed at the White House lawyer’s office last week after Warrington asked him for advice on the legality of the Pentagon who accepted said donation, according to the sources.

Trump could have buried the controversy saying that he would accept the gift. He has not said in his publications or public comments that he intends to keep the plane.

“Some people say: ‘Oh, you shouldn’t accept gifts for the country.’ My attitude is, why wouldn’t I accept a gift? He told Fox News presenter, Sean Hannity, Tuesday.

Dan Weiner, director of the election program and the Brennan Center for Justice government, said it is imperative that administration or congress obtain the details of the agreement.

“It is a different story if you use the plane when you are president and then go to a museum on which you have some control,” Weiner told ABC News.

According to Weiner, such gifts can be approved by Congress, but in most cases, these gifts are not used for private matters, according to Weiner.

“For example, a foreign country could donate a valuable painting and the president could hang it in the White House, but he would generally have to stay there to comply with the law,” he said.

Weiner said that despite the security and ethical violations raised by the use of Boeing 747 as the official government aircraft, there is no constitutional violation if Trump adheres to using the plane as the new Air Force One.

“You can question the wisdom of accepting a plane that would have to reconfigure so that the president is used one year or two to put themselves in a museum, but if it continues to be used as a government plane [after Trump leaves office] That would not represent a violation of emoluments, “he explained.

It is a different matter, he said, if Trump has access to him after he leaves office, or uses it for purposes other than Air Force One.

“I can’t see any legal way for Trump to keep that plane for personal use without the approval of the Congress,” he added.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told journalists on Monday that “the legal details of [the gift] They are still solving. “

“But, of course, any donation to this government is always done in full compliance with the law. And we commit ourselves to the greatest transparency and we will continue to do so,” he said.

A Qatar government spokesman said on Sunday that the transfer of an aircraft for “temporary use”, since Air Force One is updated by the Qatar Defense Ministry and the United States Department of Defense.

Jessica Tillipman, an associate dean of studies of government law at the Law Faculty of the University of George Washington, who has specialized in foreign corruption cases, told ABC News that Trump has tried the emolument clause several times during her first administration over her commercial interests abroad and that she was never affected with any violation.

There are still no litigation on the proposed gift, but said that the victory of Trump’s Supreme Court in the case of presidential immunity could have emboldened it to want to accept the gift.

“The Supreme Court has made it much more difficult to prosecute federal officials in corruption or president. Details are still coming, and that is what does well,” he said.

At this time, Tillipman said that one of the few ways to ensure that the administration remains within the law is through political pressure.

“It will be interesting to see the few remaining tools that Congress has and if they are going to use them,” he said, on possible legal challenges.

Congress concerns

After the news of the proposed gift came out, the Democratic leaders of Congress criticized the idea, and some called the proposed “unconstitutional” and “a bribe” gift.

The leader of the Senate minority, Chuck Schumer, promised to turn off Trump’s judicial nominees and sent a letter to the attorney general Pam Bondi who was looking for answers to the gift, including security questions.

Senator Adam Schiff D-Calif, also asked the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, investigates the role of the agency in “facilitating and serving as a transmission” in the proposed gift.

While the Republicans were not so vocal, many said significantly that they had questions about the treatment.

The leader of the majority of the Senate, John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, described the gift as “hypothetical”, but recognized concerns about his legality and security.

The North Carolina Republican senator, Thom Tillis, also said that there would be “much scrutiny” about the gift.

“There are many, many problems around those that I think will attract very serious questions if it happens and when it happens,” Tillis told journalists on Tuesday.

When asked about the constitutionality that Trump accepts the plane as a gift on Tuesday, said the president of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson. “Clearly, I think that the intention of the emolument clause is that you do not get personal gifts for personal use and all that.”

“It is a gift for the United States and other nations give us gifts all the time, but I will leave it to the administration. They know much more about the details. Okay, it is not my lane,” Johnson said on Wednesday, and added that Trump was not trying to hide anything.

Tillipman and Weiner said the continuous pressure of the public will be the true test.