First lady Melania Trump has said little about what she intends to do with her prominent position. But in new court documents, her lawyers say that the “multi-year term” during which she “is one of the most photographed women in the world” could mean millions of dollars for her personal brand. profit
While the new documents don’t specifically mention her term as first lady, the unusual statement about her expected income drew swift condemnation from ethics watchdogs as inappropriate profiteering from her high-profile position, which is typically centered on public service.
The statement came Monday in a libel lawsuit the first lady re-filed in a state trial court in Manhattan. Mrs. Trump has been suing the corporation that publishes the Daily Mail’s website over a now-retracted report that claimed she once worked as an escort. In the filing Monday, Mrs. Trump’s lawyers argued that the report was not only false and libelous, but also damaged her ability to profit off her high profile and affected her business opportunities.
Mrs. Trump “had the unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as an extremely famous and well-known person, as well as a former professional model, brand spokesperson and successful businesswoman, to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multi-million dollar business relationships for a multi-year term during which plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world,” the lawsuit said.
The products could have included apparel, accessories, jewelry, cosmetics, hair care and fragrance, among others, the suit says. The first lady is seeking compensatory and punitive damages of at least $150 million.
Richard Painter, who advised former President George W. Bush on ethics, said the language in the lawsuit shows Melania Trump is engaging “in an unprecedented, clear breach of rules about using her government position for private gain. This is a very serious situation where she says she intends to make a lot of money. That ought to be repudiated by the White House or investigated by Congress.”
Painter is part of a group of attorneys suing the president for an alleged violation of a constitutional clause that prohibits presidents from receiving foreign gifts or payments.