Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Department of Justice must comply with the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the Constitution by refusing to administratively settle the billions of dollars in legal claims filed against the United States by President Donald Trump.
- Bill Number
- H.Res. 1185
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Government Operations and Politics
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-04-16: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-23T08:06:57Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This House Resolution (H. Res. 1185) expresses the "sense of the House of Representatives"—a non-binding opinion—that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other federal agencies must refuse to administratively settle multi-billion-dollar legal claims filed by President Donald Trump against the United States, citing the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). This clause prohibits the President from receiving any payment or benefit ("emolument") from the U.S. government beyond their official salary during their term.
Key Provisions
- Core Resolution: DOJ and federal agencies are "categorically forbidden" from settling Trump's claims administratively (outside of court) due to the Emoluments Clause; Trump may sue in federal court like any citizen, but no monetary payments can be made directly by the government.
- Background "Whereas" Clauses:
- Quotes the Emoluments Clause and presidential salary law (3 U.S.C. § 102).
- Describes Trump's January 2026 lawsuit against the IRS seeking at least $10 billion for leaked tax returns (linked to 2020-2021 media reports).
- Notes additional 2023-2024 administrative claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act for $230 million related to Mar-a-Lago search and Russia investigation.
- Highlights conflicts: Cabinet officials (e.g., Attorney General) serve at the President's pleasure; Trump's "unitary executive" theory; his own admissions of deciding settlements himself.
- Invokes James Madison's principle against self-judging conflicts of interest.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- None. As a "sense of the House" resolution, it does not amend laws, appropriate funds, or create binding rules; it only states Congress's opinion and was referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: Pressures DOJ and IRS to reject settlements, potentially forcing litigation in federal courts rather than administrative resolution.
- Citizens/Taxpayers: Aims to prevent use of taxpayer funds (e.g., $10 billion claim exceeds 90% of IRS's annual budget) for presidential claims, avoiding perceived self-dealing.
- No direct international relations impact.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- President Donald Trump: Directly challenges his ability to secure government payments via settlements.
- Department of Justice and IRS: Instructed (non-bindingly) to refuse settlements.
- U.S. Taxpayers: Potential beneficiaries if settlements are blocked, protecting public funds.
- House of Representatives: Sponsors (primarily Democrats, led by Mr. Raskin) and Judiciary Committee.
- Federal Courts: May see increased litigation if administrative paths are closed.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Constitutional: Centers on Domestic Emoluments Clause interpretation—argues settlements would be unconstitutional "emoluments" enabling self-dealing; contrasts with Trump's right to sue privately.
- Legal: References Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11 (barring frivolous claims) and Federal Tort Claims Act; notes historical novelty of a sitting President suing the government for damages.
- Political: Highlights partisan tensions (Democratic sponsors criticize Trump); raises ethics concerns under "unitary executive" theory where executive officials report to the President; non-binding nature limits enforceability but signals congressional oversight.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (32)
Rep. Balint, Becca [D-VT-At Large], Rep. Boyle, Brendan F. [D-PA-2], Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46], Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. Dexter, Maxine [D-OR-3], Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-18], Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6], Rep. McCollum, Betty [D-MN-4], Rep. Mfume, Kweisi [D-MD-7], Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1], Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12], Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2], Rep. Frost, Maxwell [D-FL-10], Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4]
Recent Actions
- 2026-04-16: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2026-04-16: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Department of Justice must comply with the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the Constitution by refusing to administratively settle the billions of dollars in legal claims filed against the United States by President Donald Trump. — issued 2026-04-16 — PDF (5 pages)