Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has accused President Donald Trump of exercising ‘king-like powers’ by accepting a $130 million donation from billionaire Timothy Mellon to fund U.S. military pay during the government shutdown. The donation, which was presented as a patriotic gesture by the President, has ignited legal and political concerns over its legality under federal law.
According to Murphy, the President’s decision to accept the donation reflects a broader pattern of asserting control over government operations, potentially undermining the separation of powers. ‘One of the reasons that President Trump is refusing to negotiate is because he likes the fact that the government is closed,’ Murphy said on CNN, warning that this approach could signal a shift toward a more authoritarian form of governance.
The donation from Timothy Mellon, described by Trump as a ‘great American citizen,’ was intended to ensure the payment of military service members during the shutdown. However, the legal implications of the donation remain unclear. The U.S. Constitution’s appropriations clause requires funds to be deposited into the Treasury before being allocated for military salaries, raising questions about whether the gift circumvents congressional authority.
The Pentagon has stated that the donation was made with the condition that it be used to offset the cost of service members’ salaries and benefits. However, legal experts remain divided over whether this falls under the provisions of 10 U.S. Code § 2601, which allows the Secretary of Defense to use funds for military purposes.
While the donation’s distribution remains a topic of discussion, reports indicate that it would provide approximately $100 per service member. This raises further questions about the ethical and legal boundaries of private contributions to federal expenditures, especially during times of national emergency.
Timothy Mellon, a self-proclaimed former liberal who previously lived in Connecticut, has yet to issue public statements about his donation. The situation underscores the complex intersection of political influence, financial power, and constitutional obligations in the administration of federal resources.