A senior US Democrat has formally asked FIFA president Gianni Infantino to appear before Congress over what he calls a campaign to curry favour with President Trump, citing the FIFA Peace Prize, a Trump Tower office lease and undisclosed gifts. The request adds a formal accountability dimension to concerns about FIFA’s governance that stretch directly into the organisation’s plans for Saudi Arabia 2034.
Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, has written to FIFA president Gianni Infantino asking him to appear before the committee to discuss what Raskin describes as FIFA’s brazen campaign to curry favour with Donald Trump, City AM reported, citing an account first published by The Athletic. The letter demands a list of any gifts given to Trump or his associates, visitor logs for FIFA’s New York and Miami offices, and instructs the organisation to preserve all communications between its personnel and the Trump administration. The request lands only days after Infantino dismissed critics of the 2026 World Cup as consumed with hate, and adds a formal congressional dimension to governance concerns that stretch directly into FIFA’s plans for Saudi Arabia’s hosting of the 2034 tournament.
A Formal Congressional Request For Infantino To Appear
City AM reported that Raskin’s letter, sent on Sunday, followed FIFA’s staging of two major tournaments largely on US soil in recent years: this summer’s World Cup and last year’s Club World Cup, both of which saw President Trump appear alongside Infantino at key moments throughout their build-up and duration. The timing of the request follows directly from Infantino’s own remarks on Monday, in which he took aim at critics of visa difficulties faced by players and officials, and of Trump’s reported intervention in suspending a disciplinary ban for USA player Folarin Balogun.
What Raskin’s Letter Demands
According to City AM, Raskin’s letter singles out FIFA’s decision to lease office space inside Trump Tower in New York, and its creation of the FIFA Peace Prize, which was awarded to President Trump last year. Raskin’s letter states that FIFA had, in his words, “invented a hilariously fake” award that Trump had long sought a version of, and argues the organisation’s actions appear designed to induce favourable treatment from the administration. The letter also seeks documentation of any gifts provided to Trump or people connected to him, records of who has visited FIFA’s US offices, and a formal commitment to preserve internal communications relevant to the committee’s inquiry.
The FIFA Peace Prize And Trump Tower Office Under Scrutiny
Both the peace prize and the Trump Tower lease have drawn attention from City AM’s own reporting in recent months, which has separately tracked FIFA’s decision to open an office inside Trump’s namesake New York building and to create an award later presented to the president himself. Raskin’s letter treats these two decisions as central evidence for his broader argument that FIFA’s institutional choices under Infantino have increasingly aligned with the interests of the current US administration, rather than functioning as the independent, apolitical governing body FIFA’s own statutes describe.
White House Dismisses The Probe
City AM reported that a White House spokesperson responded to Raskin’s letter by dismissing him personally, describing him as “lightweight” and, separately, as someone whose ideas amount to what an unintelligent person would mistake for cleverness. The spokesperson credited President Trump’s leadership for the tournament’s commercial success, telling The Athletic the 2026 World Cup generated billions of dollars in revenue, delivered an economic boost across host cities, and provided what they called a safe, secure and seamless experience for fans and athletes worldwide, predicting it would be remembered as one of the greatest sporting events in history.
A Pattern Of Growing Scrutiny Around Infantino
An IOC Complaint That Went Nowhere
City AM reported that Infantino has already avoided one formal investigation this year, after the International Olympic Committee ruled that a complaint alleging he had breached obligations on political impartiality, filed over the Balogun intervention, fell outside its jurisdiction. That earlier complaint sought to establish whether Infantino’s willingness to personally review a refereeing decision at a head of state’s request amounted to a breach of FIFA’s own neutrality principles, a question the IOC ultimately declined to answer on procedural grounds rather than on the substance of the claim.
Criticism From Within Football Itself
Scrutiny of Infantino’s posture has not come only from politicians and rights organisations. City AM reported that Javier Tebas, the outspoken president of Spain’s LaLiga, questioned publicly why Infantino had dedicated an entire message to dismissing those exercising what Tebas called legitimate scrutiny, asking whether a defensive tone at this particular moment suggested something else was happening behind the scenes. Tebas’s intervention is notable because it comes from within football’s own governing structures, rather than from an external critic, echoing the concerns already raised by UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin’s decision to boycott the World Cup final over broader disagreements with FIFA.
Limits Of What Democrats Can Actually Do
City AM reported that Raskin cannot currently compel Infantino to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, because Democrats remain in the minority in the chamber, though that could change depending on the outcome of this year’s midterm elections. For now, the letter functions as a formal public record of congressional concern rather than a binding legal instrument, a distinction worth keeping in view given how the story is likely to be characterised as it spreads.
Why This Matters For Saudi Arabia’s 2034 World Cup
FIFA’s own governance framework rests on a claim to political neutrality and institutional independence from any single government, a principle directly relevant to how the organisation is expected to oversee preparations for Saudi Arabia’s hosting of the 2034 tournament. A sitting member of the US Congress formally alleging that FIFA’s recent institutional decisions, an office lease, a purpose-built award, undisclosed communications, were designed to curry favour with a head of state adds direct, documented weight to concerns already raised by governance experts such as Mark Pieth and federation leaders such as Norway’s Lisa Klaveness over how insulated FIFA’s decision-making, including the Saudi hosting award, really is from political influence.
A Governance Question That Won’t Go Away
Raskin’s letter does not itself make any allegation about the Saudi Arabia bidding process specifically. But the underlying question it raises, whether Infantino’s FIFA can be relied upon to make institutional decisions independent of political pressure from powerful heads of state, is precisely the question human rights organisations and legal complainants have already put to FIFA over its handling of Saudi Arabia’s uncontested 2034 bid. A congressional oversight request targeting the same pattern of behaviour in a different context makes that underlying concern considerably harder for FIFA to dismiss as motivated by hate or bad faith, the framing Infantino himself has repeatedly reached for.
Broader Debate Over Accountability And Sportswashing
Critics of FIFA’s recent direction have argued that the organisation’s institutional choices increasingly serve the interests of the powerful governments and figures it works alongside, rather than the sport’s stated commitment to neutrality and independent governance. A formal congressional inquiry into exactly that dynamic, arriving within days of Infantino’s own dismissive remarks about critics, gives that argument a concrete, on-the-record foundation it has not previously had. Neither FIFA nor Infantino has yet issued a substantive response to Raskin’s specific requests. For international stakeholders, rights organisations and football federations already questioning the transparency of the Saudi 2034 process, that silence, alongside the White House’s dismissive response on Infantino’s behalf, is unlikely to settle the matter.