Legal experts say the potential transaction raises thorny questions about the rules surrounding foreign gifts to sitting presidents.
President Donald Trump is reportedly preparing to accept a $400 million Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar in a transaction that legal experts say raises thorny questions about the rules surrounding foreign gifts to sitting presidents.
The so-called Foreign Emoluments Clause, a provision in the U.S. Constitution designed to curtail corruption, generally forbids officeholders from accepting gifts, emoluments (or benefits) or titles from foreign states without congressional approval.
“The Emoluments Clauses suggest Congress must consent if this is a present from a foreign state,” says Dan Urman, director of the law and public policy minor at Northeastern University, who teaches courses on the Supreme Court.
Trump said on social media that the jet is a gift to the Defense Department, and the administration was apparently planning to retrofit the jet to be used as Air Force One during his second term, according to CNN.
“So the fact that the Defense Department is getting a GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE, of a 747 aircraft to replace the 40 year old Air Force One, temporarily, in a very public and transparent transaction, so bothers the Crooked Democrats that they insist we pay, TOP DOLLAR, for the plane,” Trump posted on his social media site Sunday night. “Anybody can do that!”
@northeasternglobalnews President Trump is ready to accept a jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar — but is this legal? Northeastern legal experts explain how the Foreign Emoluments Clause, a provision of the U.S. Constitution, may apply to the $400 million gift. #Trump #President #PlaneGift #Qatar #AirForceOne #Constitution #ConstitutionalLaw ♬ original sound – NGN
President Trump is ready to accept a jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar — but is this legal? Northeastern legal experts explain how the Foreign Emoluments Clause, a provision of the U.S. Constitution, may apply to the $400 million gift. #Trump #President #PlaneGift #Qatar #AirForceOne #Constitution #ConstitutionalLaw
Reporting from ABC News notes that the plane “will be transferred to the Trump Presidential Library Foundation no later than Jan. 1, 2029, and any costs relating to its transfer will be paid for by the U.S. Air Force.”
Karoline Leavitt, a White House spokesperson, said that “any gift given by a foreign government is always accepted in full compliance with all applicable laws.”
What if Trump wanted to keep the jetliner after he leaves office?
“It’s unprecedented. If this is a government-to-government gift, and Trump will not use it when he is no longer president, he’s on slightly more solid ground,” Urman says. “Then the gift is to the country, not Trump himself. But a plane is a far cry from cherry blossoms from Japan or a statue from France.”
Should the foundation receive the jet, it could be construed as a personal gift, which runs afoul of the constitutional provision. On top of that, there are “obvious” national security implications should Trump accept the jet and use it for official travel, Urman says.
“The Reagan presidential library actually has in its possession a former Air Force One that was decommissioned,” Urman says. “But if Trump used the plane after leaving office, that’s a far cry from putting a plane on display in a presidential library.”
Sign up for NGN’s daily newsletter for news, discovery and analysis from around the world.
The Supreme Court recently ducked an opportunity to clarify the nature and extent of the Foreign Emoluments Clause in a case involving Trump’s hotels abroad that began during his first term.
A Washington, D.C.-based watchdog sued Trump in 2017, claiming that he hadn’t divested from his companies in other parts of the world, and was therefore benefiting financially from guests and events at his hotels, leases in his buildings and lucrative real estate deals.
The court ultimately declared the issue moot when Trump left office in 2021, leaving the constitutional provision unelaborated. Experts say it has largely never been tested.
“One of the reasons it hasn’t been applied is that no prior president has ever dreamed of doing something like this,” says Jeremy R. Paul, a professor of law and former dean of the Northeastern University School of Law.
For Paul and Urman, the issue with potential violations of the Emoluments Clauses has been one of standing, as was the case in CREW v. Trump. In order to bring a lawsuit under the Emoluments Clause, a plaintiff would need to make the case that they were directly injured by by the transaction in question, Urman says.
In CREW v. Trump, the lower court ruled that the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington lacked standing — that the case presented a political question and was not ripe for adjudication. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated that decision, noting that what constitutes an emolument is not for Congress to decide, but rather the federal courts.
“This is another example of what I would describe as a culture of a war on rules,” Paul says. “Trump seemed to find a way to argue that this is consistent with the letter of the law — even if it’s in violation of the spirit of the law.”
News of the potential Qatari gift comes ahead of a planned four-day trip to the Middle East, where Trump is scheduled to meet with Gulf leaders.
Business observers have also raised more than an eyebrow at the deal.
“Could such a gift really come with no strings attached?” says Ravi Ramamurti, director of Northeastern’s Center for Emerging Markets and a university distinguished professor in international business and strategy. “What signal would this transaction send to other countries about the new norms for winning friends in the United States? You have to wonder what might come next.”