A shareholder in Circle Internet Group has filed a lawsuit alleging that two UAE-linked transactions involving World Liberty Financial violated the US Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause.
The deals include a reported $500 million investment for a 49% stake in World Liberty and a $2 billion MGX investment in Binance made using World Liberty’s USD1 stablecoin.
The case raises questions about potential conflicts of interest and faces legal hurdles, including whether the shareholder has standing to bring the claims.
US President Donald Trump, his family-linked cryptocurrency venture World Liberty Financial and other defendants have been sued over two transactions linked to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), with a shareholder alleging that the deals violated the US Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause. The complaint, filed by J. Benjamin Greenberg, a shareholder in Circle Internet Group, argues that the transactions benefited Trump through foreign-linked payments and harmed investors in Circle, which competes with World Liberty in the stablecoin market. The allegations have not been proven in court.
What Are the Two UAE-Linked World Liberty Transactions?
The lawsuit centres on two deals involving World Liberty Financial. In the first, an investment entity backed by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the UAE’s national security adviser, agreed to pay $500 million for a 49% stake in World Liberty shortly before Trump’s January 2025 inauguration. The complaint alleges that millions of dollars from the transaction subsequently flowed to Trump after he took office.
The second transaction involves a $2 billion investment by Abu Dhabi’s MGX fund in cryptocurrency exchange Binance, with the payment made using World Liberty’s USD1 stablecoin. MGX is chaired by Sheikh Tahnoon. The lawsuit alleges that the transaction increased demand for World Liberty’s digital currency and benefited Trump financially. Together, the two deals amount to $2.5 billion, although they involved different transactions and payment structures.
Why Does the Lawsuit Matter?
The case raises questions about potential conflicts of interest when a sitting US president has financial connections to a business receiving substantial investment from entities linked to foreign governments. The Foreign Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution restricts federal officeholders from accepting certain payments or benefits from foreign states without congressional consent. Greenberg is asking the court to rule on the alleged constitutional violations and order the disclosure and return of profits found to be unlawful.
The White House has rejected the allegations, calling the lawsuit politically motivated and maintaining that there are no conflicts of interest. World Liberty Financial has also dismissed the claims as meritless and said it complies with US laws and regulations. Circle, meanwhile, has clarified that the case was filed by an individual shareholder and was not initiated, directed or authorised by the company. The court has yet to determine the merits of the complaint.
The case could also face preliminary legal hurdles before a court considers the constitutional claims. A key question will be whether Greenberg has the legal standing to bring the action on Circle’s behalf and whether the alleged harm to the company can be established. Earlier lawsuits challenging Trump’s foreign business interests during his first presidency ended without a final ruling on the merits of the emoluments claims.
