When Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin came to Washington last January for two nights – one of many visits the Republican had made to the nation’s capital – he stayed at President Trump’s D.C. hotel. Kentucky taxpayers initially footed the $686 bill, records obtained by The Washington Post show.

Election_2019_Kentucky_Governor_99067

Republican Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin speaks with reporters as he concedes the gubernatorial race Nov. 14. Bevin’s stay at the Trump hotel in Washington this year may have violated the Constitution’s emolument’s clause.  Associated Press/Timothy D. Easley

Though Kentucky’s Republican Party reimbursed the state for Bevin’s stay two months later, the transaction may still run afoul of an anti-corruption provision of the Constitution barring the president from receiving any “emoluments,” or payments, from the states, legal experts say.

In two cases winding their way through federal court, plaintiffs have alleged that President Trump – by retaining his financial interest in his companies and doing business with state governments – has violated the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause. A central example cited by plaintiffs has been visits to the hotel by fervent Trump supporter and Republican Paul LePage, while he was governor of Maine.

Bevin’s previously unreported stay at the hotel is now likely to become another example for plaintiffs in one case as soon as three weeks from now. Attorneys general for D.C. and Maryland plan to argue in federal appeals court that the president must receive approval from Congress to accept payments from states or from foreign governments.

Attorneys defending Trump have argued in court that the emoluments clauses do not bar the president from accepting market-rate hotel room payments and that Trump has not violated either of the emoluments clauses.

As governor, Bevin has been a close ally of Trump, running a campaign spot saying Trump “is taking America to new heights” and that “together our changes are working.” He has been a regular White House visitor, attending events on workforce development and criminal justice. Earlier this month, Trump campaigned in Kentucky on behalf of Bevin’s re-election bid, which failed when he lost to Democrat Andy Beshear last week.

Other guests have acknowledged staying at the hotel as a way of trying to curry favor with the president. Trump’s company is now considering selling the property, citing the difficulty of maximizing profits while Trump is in office.

The documents detailing Bevin’s stay were provided to the Post by the government watchdog group American Oversight, which acquired them through a public documents request. Austin Evers, executive director of American Oversight, said the hotel represented “the president’s mixing of business, politics, and public service, which it seems Matt Bevin may have chosen to emulate as well.”

Spokespersons for Bevin and the Kentucky Republican Party did not respond to requests for comment.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, Democrats suing Trump over the Constitutional provisions, said through spokespersons that such a state-funded stay – even though it was later reimbursed by a political party – would strengthen their case.

“As we alleged in our complaint, we believe that instances like this are taking place regularly and we are not surprised to learn of this development,” said Frosh spokeswoman Raquel Coombs.

Judges on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals are scheduled to hear arguments in the case Dec. 9 in Richmond, Virginia, and legal experts expect that because no court has ever previously ruled on the emoluments provisions the case is likely to reach the Supreme Court.

In a separate case, business owners are suing Trump over the emoluments clauses, alleging he has used the presidency to unfair advantage over competing restaurants and hotels. That case is with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. A third case, brought by Congressional Democrats, focuses on foreign spending at Trump properties.

An attorney for the plaintiffs, Deepak Gupta, said that “it’s quite possible that this payment constitutes a violation of the Domestic Emoluments Clause.”

“To prevent domestic corruption, that clause strictly limits the President to a fixed salary and bars him from accepting ‘any other emolument’ from any of the States,” he said.

A private attorney for Trump, William Consovoy, did not respond to a request for comment. Consovoy has argued that the president cannot be investigated for any crime while he is in office.

The Justice Department, which is also defending Trump in the cases, declined comment. Officials at the Trump Organization did not respond to a request for comment.

It is unclear why Bevin was in Washington Jan. 29-31, 2018 or if other state officials, such as support staff or security personnel, stayed at the Trump hotel with him.

Related Headlines


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.