I think the thing that saves Trump Jr from treason is that Russia would probably not be considered an enemy. The relevant bit of the Treason definition seems to be
Quote:
Originally Posted by Article III US Constitution
adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Code 2381
adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere
This article seems to be a decent source for what "aid and comfort" might mean, and it seems pretty clear taking a meeting with a known agent of a foreign power would constitute it.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/787437?...n_tab_contents
Quote:
Wherever overt acts have been committed which, in their natural consequence, if successful, would encourage and advance the interests of [enemies], in judgment of law aid and comfort are given
So it doesn't matter that no intelligence was received, it only matters what would 'naturally' have happened if the purpose was actually achieved. I don't see how you could argue taking a meeting with agents of Russia wouldn't have advanced their interests if successful - it's a natural assumption that, absent special circumstances, people are acting in their own interests.
However, Russia probably aren't enemies. It seems "enemies" is narrowly understood to apply "only to the subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us".
The possible wrinkle is that the US (along with most countries) has pretty much given up on declarations of war, so I'd imagine you couldn't just argue Russia isn't an enemy as no war has been declared. Further the US is involved in a clear war zone along with Russia, and, up until Trump's presidency openly wanted Assad gone, who Russia openly supported. I think there were no clashes between even proxy groups, however - at least those that the two powers would admit to - until the bombing of the air strip recently.
Should add I know this is all just academic, even if it could fit the law I don't think Trump Jr is getting charged with Treason.