However, the three-judge appeals panel rejected that legal framing, holding unanimously that a district court judge in Washington was correct when he tossed out the case in 2018.

"We see no reason to conclude that District common law recognizes anything like Cork’s unfair-competition claim," Judge Thomas Griffith wrote in an opinion joined by Judges Merrick Garland and Stephen Williams.

Cork Wine Bar in Washington, D.C. | Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Cork's lawyers argued that a provision in the lease for the Trump hotel, which sits on federal property, prohibits Trump or other federal officials from profiting from the arrangement. However, the appeals court said that didn't support the suit's theory of unfair competition under local law.

"Cork articulates no link between the lease provision and the District’s common law of unfair competition, and we see none," Griffith wrote.

Griffith was appointed by President George W. Bush. Garland is an appointee of President Bill Clinton. Williams was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

Cork's attorneys also asked the federal appeals court to punt the central issue in the case to the local D.C. appeals court, but the federal judges passed up that proposal.

"We believe in the rule of law, and we respect — even if we might disagree with — the ruling of the D.C. Circuit. We do note that the judges realized removal of our claims to federal court narrowly boxed us in," lawyers Alan Morrison, Mark Zaid and Brad Moss said in a statement.

"President Trump has intentionally financially profited from serving as the elected leader of our country for his own self interests. This decision does not negate that such actions are ethically unacceptable," the attorneys added. "Our legal challenge may be concluded, but the operation of a for-profit hotel by an elected leader is plainly the type of corruption that the rule of law should prevent."

An attorney for the Trump Organization didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

The similar, emoluments-clause cases against Trump have produced varying results. The emoluments clauses prohibit a president from profiting off of foreign governments or from receiving any money from the U.S. government except an annual salary.

Earlier this month, the D.C. Circuit rejected such a challenge brought by Democrats in Congress. Last year, the New York-based 2nd Circuit revived an emoluments suit there, while the Richmond, Va.-based 4th Circuit threw out a suit filed by the Maryland and D.C. governments.

The full bench of the 4th Circuit recently took up that case again, but has not issued a new ruling. The Justice Department has asked the 2nd Circuit to review the decision there, but that court hasn't ruled on that request.