Outside attorneys for President-elect Donald Trump have produced a detailed legal document justifying his right to profit from 'fair market value' bookings at his luxury hotels by citing the federalist papers, salaries of officials in Arkansas before it was a state, and a victim of Nazi persecution who got compensation.

The lawyers, at the firm of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, produced a five-page 'white paper' that includes 30 footnotes that parse the Constitution and other historical documents to justify Trump's ability to continue to profit as a hotel magnate while serving as commander in chief.

The paper, which lists six authors, brings up Trump's new luxury hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue, which sits on the inaugural parade route on land that continues to be owned by the federal government.

At issue is whether room bookings would violate the Constitution's 'Emoluments Clause,' which prohibits any 'office f Profit or Trust' from accepting a 'present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.'

President-elect Donald Trump's invoked the Federalist Papers, salaries of officials in Arkansas before it was a state, and a victim of Nazi persecution who got compensation to make the case that Trump should be able to benefit from bookings at his luxury hotels

Trump's lawyers do not appear to have scrimped on historical research – or what some would consider an emolument in the form of top legal fees – to produce their findings.

They cite, among other things, a failed Titles of Nobility amendment to the Constitution, which passed Congress in 1810 but wasn't passed by enough states to take effect.

It would have barred citizens from taking 'any present, pension, office, or emolument, of any kind whatever, from any Emperor, King, Prince, or foreign Power,' and stripped violators of their citizenship.

The lawyers argue that state voters who approved the amendment – which nearly got adopted – couldn't possibly have meant to prohibit people from engaging in simple commerce with foreigners – therefore opting for a narrow definition of emoluments.

The five-page white paper invokes a pension Ronald Reagan got from his time as governor of California

An opinion regarding compensation from a victim of Nazi persecution also came into play

Trump's lawyers invoked James Madison - not to mention the late Justice Antonin Scalia and numerous other individuals to make the case for ongoing 'fair market' hotel bookings

President-elect Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he was transferring authority over his business empire to his adult sons, and his lawyers produced a lengthy brief of why he should continue to be allowed to collect hotel income

'That suggests that the public did not understand the prohibition on accepting foreign emoluments to prohibit commerce with foreign states or their representatives through fair-market-value exchanges—and, by implication, that the Foreign Emoluments Clause does not reach these transactions,' they write.

One footnote cites 'Salaries of Officers of Arkansas Territory' from 1819 from the time before it was a state.

The cite Alexander Hamilton and James Madison's Federalist Papers as buttressing a Supreme Court interpretation of Emoluments with an understanding that the term 'embrac[es] every species of compensation or pecuniary profit derived from a discharge of the duties of [an] office.'

In other words, it is meant to incorporate things derived from the public office, but not from unrelated income like a swanky hotel.

They reference a 1981 court ruling allowing President Reagan's ability to accept a California state pension, and cite a similar argument relating to a victim of Nazi persecution who wanted to keep collecting civil damages – a letter from the assistant comptroller to the attorney general from 1955.

'Another reached a similar conclusion about civil damages paid to a victim of Nazi persecution because they were 'not paid as profit, gain, compensation, perquisite, or advantage flowing to him as an incident to possession of an office or as compensation for services rendered,' the authors write.

Some outside experts disagree. Richard Painter, who was the top ethics lawyer in George W. Bush's White House, has testified that Trump would violate the Emoluments Clause on his first day in office if he maintains properties like the D.C. hotel.

Attorney Fred Fielding, who served as counsel to presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, advised Trump on the propriety of his ongoing business

ALL'S FAIR: The authors invoke a failed constitutional amendment to make the case that the Emoluments Clause shouldn't apply

One footnote references salaries of officeholders of the Arkansas Territory from 1819

The lawyers reference Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers

Trump attorney Sheri Dillon described how the Trump Organization will be run during Trump's presidency

The paper lists six authors, including Sheri Dillon and Fred Fielding

'I don't know if this problem isn't solved whether the Chief Justice can even show up to give him the oath of office,' Painter said at a hearing organized by Oversight Committee Democrats.

'This is not some arcane provision. All it says is no for government payoffs for anybody holding a position of trust with the United States Government, not just the president,' he said.

Former ambassador to the Czech Republic Norm Eisen, President Obama's former ethics counsel, said at the same forum: 'Every one of those dollars that hits the hotel come January 20 will be in violation of the United States Constitution.'

Attorney Sheri Dillon, a partner at the firm who also has worked as Trump's tax counsel, made the case for Trump keeping his business at the president-elect's press conference Wednesday at Trump Tower.

Also present was Fred Fielding, a partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. Fielding served as counsel to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.