February, 15 2017, 01:30pm EDT
Top Legal Experts to NY Attorney General: Revoke the Trump Organization's Charter
Free Speech for People demands investigation into President’s unconstitutional conflicts of interest and dissolution of Trump Organization
NEW YORK, N.Y.
Free Speech for People (FSFP), a non-partisan legal advocacy organization, today delivered a letter to New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman demanding he investigate whether to revoke the charter of The Trump Organization, Inc. due to the President's ownership stake in the corporation and its history of illegal activity. Unlike existing legal actions against the President's conflicts of interest, the legal strategy FSFP unveiled today is based on Attorney General Schneiderman's power and legal precedent to pursue this investigation in New York state court without permission from Congress or any other arm of the federal government.
"The President's continued ownership stake in the Trump Organization poses a grave threat to our Constitution and our country. Attorney General Schneiderman needs to investigate the Trump Organization's corrupt involvement in the President's self-enrichment scheme, and whether to dissolve the company and revoke its corporate charter," said Ron Fein, Legal Director for Free Speech For People. "The Attorney General of New York does not need Congress to pursue this investigation. He does not need the state legislature. Right now, he can use the power the people of New York have vested in him to ensure that the President is not above the law."
According to Section 1101 of New York's Business Corporation Law, the Attorney General is empowered to dissolve a corporation and revoke its charter if that corporation abuses or exceeds its legal authority. As the letter details, the Trump Organization--which is incorporated and headquartered in New York--is subject to this process due to its continued entanglement in presidential corruption and ethics violations in violation of New York public policy and the U.S. Constitution, as well as its pattern of allegedly fraudulent and illegal business activity. The Trump Organization--the nerve center for an empire of about 500 affiliated corporations and LLCs that own Trump's empire of hotels, golf courses, and other properties--could be placed in receivership by a state judge if the Attorney General pursues an investigation into revoking the corporation's charter.
The letter is also being made available to the public on FSFP's website. FSFP is encouraging members of the public to sign a petition urging the Attorney General to pursue this investigation, and to contact his office to voice support: https://freespeechforpeople.org/revoke-trump-charter/.
"President Trump's unprecedented corruption of the Oval Office abuses the public trust and directly violates the U.S. Constitution," said John Bonifaz, the Co-Founder and President of Free Speech for People. "We urge the New York Attorney General to initiate this investigation, and we urge people across the country to join us in this campaign to hold the Trump Organization accountable under the law."
In their letter, Free Speech for People lays out a two-part legal argument for why the Trump Organization is acting in excess and abuse of the law, and why the Attorney General should investigate revoking its charter:
1. By continuing to operate under Trump family ownership and control while President Trump is in the White House, the Trump Organization flagrantly abuses its state-granted powers, violating the public policies of New York State against corruption and conflicts of interest, and violating the U.S. Constitution, including the Foreign Emoluments Clause and the Domestic Emoluments Clause. The Trump Organization and the President have consistently failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the law, such as placing the President's controlling interest in a blind trust.
2. The Trump Organization has a documented history of alleged illegal, fraudulent, and abusive activity--including racial discrimination in housing, fraud against customers and investors, and violations of labor law and campaign finance law--demonstrating that it is acting outside its legal authority.
"New York's law is clear: A corporation forfeits its charter when its business is persistently fraudulent or violates the public policy of the state--and the Trump Organization is quite clearly failing on both of these counts," said Jonathan Abady, counsel for Free Speech for People and founding partner of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady. "The case we lay out is one grounded in state and Constitutional law, and based on the public and documented statements and behavior of Donald Trump and the Trump Organization. We are confident that the Attorney General will give this matter careful consideration and come to the same conclusions we did."
"Never in our nation's history, until now, has a business corporation been effectively merged with the presidency of the United States to enable the President and his family to use the presidency to enrich themselves," said Ben Clements, counsel to Free Speech for People and Chairman of its Board of Directors. "The use of the Trump Organization to facilitate this corruption and continuous violations of the United States Constitution is contrary to New York law and it is incumbent on the Attorney General to investigate and take appropriate action."
The Attorney General of New York has had the power to revoke corporate charters for more than a century. For example, in 1994, the Attorney General successfully brought suit to compel the judicial dissolution of a for-profit business school network that had conducted its business in a persistently illegal manner and contrary to public policy.
Free Speech For People is a national non-partisan non-profit organization founded on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC that works to defend our democracy and our Constitution.
LATEST NEWS
'Serious Disregard for Human Life': Dem Senators Press Hegseth on Yemen Civilian Casualties
"President Trump has called himself a 'peacemaker,' but that claim rings hollow when U.S. military operations kill scores of civilians."
Apr 25, 2025
A trio of Democratic senators on Thursday demanded answers from embattled Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth regarding U.S. airstrikes in Yemen, which have reportedly killed scores of civilians including numerous women and children since last month.
"We write to you concerning reports that U.S. strikes against the Houthis at the Ras Isa fuel terminal in Yemen last week killed dozens of civilians, potentially more than 70," Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) wrote in a letter to Hegseth.
The lawmakers noted that "the United Nations Protection Cluster's Civilian Impact Monitoring Project has... assessed that March 2025 marked the highest monthly casualty count in Yemen in almost two years, tripling the previous month, with a total of 162 civilian casualties."
"If these reports of civilian casualties are accurate, they should come as no surprise," the senators said. "Using explosive weapons in populated areas—as these intense strikes appear to do—always carries a high risk of civilian harm."
"Further, reports suggest that the Trump administration plans to dismantle civilian harm mitigation policies and procedures at the Pentagon designed to reduce civilian casualties in U.S. operations," the letter notes. "And the Trump administration has already dismissed senior, nonpartisan judge advocates, or JAG officers, who provide critical legal counsel to U.S. warfighters, especially when it comes to the laws of war and adherence to U.S. civilian harm mitigation policies."
"The Defense Department also recently loosened the rules of engagement to allow [U.S. Central Command] and other combatant commands to conduct strikes without requiring White House sign-off, removing necessary checks and balances on crucial life-and-death decisions," the senators added. "Taken altogether, these moves suggest that the Trump administration is abandoning the measures necessary to meet its obligations to reducing civilian harm."
The senators asked Hegseth to answer the following questions:
- Has the Department of Defense (DOD) assessed the number of noncombatant and combatant casualties in each of its strikes inside Yemen?
- What has DOD's process been for assessing the acceptable civilian casualties for individual strikes inside Yemen, and assessing estimated levels of civilian harm and collateral damage?
- What role have legal advisers, including JAG officers, played in reviewing the legality of U.S. strikes in Yemen?
- What DOD instructions or orders currently govern department civilian harm mitigation and response actions?
- Were the civilian harm mitigation and response experts at CENTCOM and/or at the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence consulted in planning for these strikes?
- How does the department plan to engage with the families or communities affected by these strikes, including acknowledging civilian harm and exploring avenues for potential redress?
Last month, Hegseth
announced that the Pentagon's Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Office and Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, which was established during the Biden administration, would be closed. Hegseth—who has
supported pardons for convicted U.S. war criminals—lamented during his Senate confirmation hearing that "restrictive rules of engagement" have "made it more difficult to defeat our enemies," who "should get bullets, not attorneys," according to his 2024 book The War on Warriors.
Asked during his confirmation hearing whether troops under his leadership would adhere to the Geneva Conventions, Hegseth replied, "What we are not going to do is put international conventions above Americans."
During his first administration, President Donald Trumprelaxed rules of military engagement meant to protect civilians as he followed through on his campaign pledge to "bomb the shit" out of Islamic State militants and "take out their families." Thousands of civilians were killed during the campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria as then-Defense Secretary James "Mad Dog" Mattis announced a shift from a policy of attrition to one of "annihilation."
Meanwhile, noncombatant casualties soared by over 300% in Afghanistan between the final year of the Obama administration and 2019.
Overall, upward of 400,000 civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen have died as a direct result of the U.S.-led War on Terror, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.
In Yemen, the U.K.-based monitor Airwars says U.S. forces have killed hundreds of civilians in 181 declared actions since 2002. Overall, hundreds of thousands of Yemenis have died during the civil war that began in 2014, with international experts attributing more than 150,000 Yemeni deaths to U.S.-backed, Saudi-led bombing and blockade.
The U.S. bombing of Yemen has not received nearly as much coverage in the corporate media as the scandal involving Hegseth's use of Signal chats to share plans for attacking the Middle Eastern country with colleagues, a journalist, and relatives. However, critics say the mounting backlash over the high civilian casualties there is belying Trump's claim of an anti-war presidency.
"President Trump has called himself a 'peacemaker,' but that claim rings hollow when U.S. military operations kill scores of civilians," the senators stressed in their letter. "The reported high civilian casualty numbers from U.S. strikes in Yemen demonstrate a serious disregard for civilian life, and call into question this administration's ability to conduct military operations in accordance with U.S. best practices for civilian harm mitigation and international law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Journalist Sues to Secure Three Months Worth of Hegseth Signal Chat Messages
"And we are bringing this case to make sure that they can't just put national security at risk for their own convenience and then destroy all the evidence afterwards," said the head of the group that filed the lawsuit.
Apr 25, 2025
As the Trump administration faces a metastasizing controversy over reports of U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's use of the commercial messaging app Signal, including to discuss U.S. strikes in Yemen, the legal group National Security Counselors on Friday sued on behalf of a journalist to secure three months worth of conversations that took place on the encrypted platform.
According to The Hill, which was first report the news of the lawsuit, the complaint requests Hegseth's Signal messages and the messages from other top Trump officials.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit is journalist Jeffrey Stein, the founding editor of the outlet SpyTalk. Stein sought the three months worth of chat records via Freedom of Information Act request and is now taking legal action to obtain them, according to the complaint, which was filed in federal court.
News about my Signalgate iceberg lawsuit for @spytalker.bsky.social: it's OUT!
[image or embed]
— National Security Counselors 🕵 (@nationalsecuritylaw.org) April 25, 2025 at 12:35 PM
"The heads of at least five of the most powerful agencies in the national security community were freely texting over an app that was not approved for sensitive communications and setting it to automatically delete everything they said," Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors, told The Hill. "Since then we've learned that we were right to be worried, thanks to the news about Hegseth's Signal chat with his wife and personal lawyer about bombing plans."
In what's now become known as "Signalgate," The Atlanticrevealed last month that its editor in chief Jeffrey Goldberg had been accidentally included in a Signal group chat with top administration officials where they discussed forthcoming U.S. strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen. The Atlantic later published messages from the chat.
Members of the chat, dubbed "Houthi PC small group," included Hegseth; National Security Adviser Mike Waltz; Vice President JD Vance; CIA Director John Ratcliffe; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
The defendants listed in the lawsuit from the National Security Counselors are the Department of Defense, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the CIA, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The New York Timesreported last week that Hegseth had shared information about impending U.S. strikes in Yemen in another Signal group chat included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer on March 15. The outlet cited four unnamed sources with knowledge of the matter.
In response to the Times' reporting, a spokesperson for the Pentagon wrote on April 20: The the newspaper "relied only on the words of people who were fired this week and appear to have a motive to sabotage the secretary and the president's agenda. There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story."
The Times responded a day later saying that it stood by the reporting, that the Pentagon had not denied the existence of the chat, and that the story did not characterize the information in the chat as classified.
In yet another twist, The Associated Pressreported Thursday, citing two unnamed sources familiar with the situation, that Hegseth had an internet connection set up in his office at the Pentagon that bypassed government security protocols—also known as a "dirty" line—in order to use Signal on a personal computer.
The AP reported that the advantage of this kind of a line is that a user would be essentially "masked" and not show up as an IP address assigned to the Defense Department, but it would also leave that user vulnerable to hacking.
Speaking of the lawsuit filed by National Security Counselors, McClanahan toldThe Hill that "this administration has proven again and again that it is allergic to accountability and transparency."
"And we are bringing this case to make sure that they can't just put national security at risk for their own convenience and then destroy all the evidence afterwards," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Amazon Exemplifies a Right-Wing Tax Code Rigged for Oligarchs Like Jeff Bezos
A new report makes clear "what's at stake by detailing the numerous ways Trump's tax code is designed to favor Amazon and its executives."
Apr 25, 2025
Few if any corporations in the United States better exemplify the rigged nature of the nation's tax code than the e-commerce behemoth Amazon, which throughout its history has made use of cavernous loopholes to avoid taxation and build massive wealth for its top executives—including founder Jeff Bezos.
In a new report titled "Amazon and Our Rigged Tax System," a coalition of advocacy organizations details how "corporate tax advantages have been essential to the company's rapid growth and increasing market dominance"—and examines how Republican plans for another round of tax cuts could further benefit the corporation and Bezos.
The report from the Institute for Policy Studies, Athena Coalition, and PowerSwitch Action notes that Amazon—described as a "perfect case study in what is wrong with our tax code"—has "used credits and loopholes to avoid paying even the sharply reduced" 21% statutory corporate tax rate established in 2017 by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which President Donald Trump signed into law early in his first term.
If Amazon had paid the 21% statutory corporate tax rate between 2018 and 2021, the company's federal tax bill during that period would have been $12.5 billion higher, the groups estimated.
But in 2018, the first year the TCJA was in effect, Amazon received more in federal tax credits than it paid in taxes, giving the company a negative federal tax rate.
Bezos, who stepped down as Amazon's CEO in 2021 but still serves as executive chairman, has also benefited substantially from the skewed U.S. tax code. The report estimates that Bezos, one of the wealthiest people in the world, "pocketed $6.2 billion as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's failure to address the disparity in tax rates on income from wealth versus income from work."
"On his $36.7 billion in Amazon stock sales since that tax reform, Bezos owed only a 20% capital gains tax, far less than the 37% top marginal rate on ordinary income," the new report notes.
Andy Jassy, the company's current CEO, has "pocketed at least $6.6 million in savings over the past seven years thanks to the TCJA's reduction in the top marginal income tax rate," according to the new report.
"To stop autocracy, we need to challenge the corporations and billionaires behind and benefiting from oligarchy, not give them more tax breaks."
The report was published as Republicans in the U.S. Congress, with full support from President Donald Trump, work on tax legislation that's expected to renew individual provisions of the TCJA that would otherwise expire at the end of the year.
If the Republican-controlled Congress extends the soon-to-expire estate tax provisions of the TCJA—which doubled the federal estate tax exemption—"Bezos and Jassy's heirs would enjoy savings of $5.6 million," the new report estimates.
The advocacy groups said they produced the report out of "shared concern that a rising oligarchy is building an economy that bankrolls billionaires while leaving workers and small businesses behind."
"Right now, working families are bracing for drastic cuts to life-saving programs like Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare and harmful slashing of pro-consumer regulations," the groups said. "Meanwhile, big corporations like Amazon and their executives stand to get even richer and more powerful through the huge tax breaks proposed by the administration and Congress. This fight has profound implications not only for Amazon and its executives, but for the balance of power in our economy."
Lauren Jacobs, executive director of PowerSwitch Action, said in a statement that "Amazon and Jeff Bezos have made billions squeezing every drop of profit they can out of our communities by breaking workers' bodies, poisoning our air, and sucking up public subsidies, and now they're selling out our fundamental freedoms."
"To stop autocracy," said Jacobs, "we need to challenge the corporations and billionaires behind and benefiting from oligarchy, not give them more tax breaks."
The report proposes a number of potential legislative solutions that it describes collectively as a "pro-worker and small business fair tax agenda."
Among the proposals are raising rather than cutting the statutory corporate tax rate and closing loopholes, imposing tax penalties on companies with massive CEO-to-worker-pay gaps, raising taxes on stock buybacks, and lifting the Social Security payroll tax cap to ensure the wealthy "pay their fair share into the system."
"This report highlights what's at stake by detailing the numerous ways Trump's tax code is designed to favor Amazon and its executives over the very workers and independent small businesses that have been hurt by Amazon," said Ryan Gerety, director of the Athena Coalition. "Over the next several months, we must stand together to protect public programs and oppose tax handouts to corporate billionaires like Andy Jassy and Jeff Bezos."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular