Can Trump legally accept a $400 million plane from Qatar? What experts, Constitution say

President Donald Trump is facing backlash for his willingness to accept an airplane worth an estimated $400 million from Qatar’s royal family. 

ABC News first reported that Trump is set to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from Qatar. While Trump is president, it would be used as the new Air Force One, then it would go to Trump’s presidential library after his term ends.

If accepted, the airplane could become the most expensive gift from a foreign government to a U.S. elected official, ABC News reported. Members of Congress, including Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said such a gift would be unconstitutional.

"Not only is this farcically corrupt, it is blatantly unconstitutional," Sanders wrote on X. "Congress must not allow this over-the-top kleptocracy to proceed."

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said on Fox Business on May 13, "The Constitution specifically says you can’t take gifts from foreign leaders." 

Laura Loomer, a conservative activist, told Politico, "If the initial reports are factual, I think it’s concerning." Conservative commentator Ben Shaprio called the gift proposal "skeezy."

When asked about the potential gift at a May 12 executive order signing, Trump blamed Boeing’s lack of progress in building a new Air Force One. He said he would be "stupid" to refuse a free airplane, and said he won’t use it after he leaves office.

"It’s not a gift to me, it’s a gift to the Department of Defense," he said.

Legal experts told PolitiFact they believe accepting the gift would violate the U.S. Constitution’s emoluments clause, which reads, "No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

Stanley Brand, Penn State-Dickinson Law School distinguished fellow in law and government, said, "Acceptance of the Qatari aircraft would require the consent of Congress under the express terms of the Constitution." 

The emoluments clause was designed "to prevent foreign nations from gaining improper influence" over U.S. leaders, said David Forte, Cleveland State University emeritus law professor. The Qatari offer "looks precisely like the kind of gift that the clause was written to prohibit," Forte said.

Experts differed on whether accepting the plane would be an impeachable offense. Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, said that if Trump accepts the gift, it could be an impeachable deed, because it would amount to "a fully corrupt act."

Forte said the gift wouldn’t necessarily amount to a bribe or an impeachable offense, but it "is a form of influence buying designed to gain the gratitude of the recipient by playing to his vanity."

During Trump’s first term, Congressional Democrats, private individuals and attorneys general from Maryland and Washington, D.C., filed lawsuits against Trump stemming from the emoluments clause. However, many of the cases were dismissed on procedural grounds, and the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule on the transactions’ underlying constitutionality.

Trump’s possible acceptance of Qatar’s plane is different, said Frank Bowman, a University of Missouri emeritus law professor. In his first term, Trump said payments were made to his businesses. This time, there would be no connection to Trump’s businesses in the case of the Qatari plane. It would be a gift offered for free with no promise of payment from Trump or the U.S. Treasury, Bowman said.

NBC News, citing an anonymous senior Justice Department official, reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi approved a memo prepared by the agency’s Office of Legal Counsel that deemed it was legal for the Defense Department to accept the gift. Bondi previously lobbied on behalf of Qatar on human trafficking issues, earning $115,000 per month. 

Bowman called Bondi’s approval of the idea "transparent baloney." Because Trump would receive the plane’s benefits during and potentially after his presidency, "that's a present, or ‘emolument,’ any way you slice it."

Can the emoluments clause be enforced against Trump?

Legal experts said it’s unlikely that Congress, controlled by Republicans, will stop Trump from accepting the gift.

Meghan Faulkner, communications director for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, D.C., said that since it appears the Justice Department has signed off on receiving the gift, it "could make it harder to hold him accountable."

Bowman said the Justice Department, according to longstanding policy, wouldn’t prosecute a sitting president.

Faulkner said Trump stands to benefit again after running out the clock on emoluments challenges during his first term. "Enforcing the Emoluments Clause in the courts would face similar challenges (in his second term), including the challenge of finding a plaintiff who has standing to challenge the violations," she said.

This is not the first time critics have flagged transactions to Trump that could potentially lead to payments beyond legal limits. Experts said Trump’s cryptocurrency could make it possible to facilitate foreign donations and channel money to him beyond legal limits for campaign contributions.