The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit “threw out a lawsuit by more than 200 Democratic members of Congress that alleged President Trump was improperly profiting from his presidency.”
The three judges ruled unanimously. They agreed “the lawmakers didn’t have legal standing to proceed with their claims.”
In the opinion, the judges said the Democratic lawmakers “couldn’t assert the institutional interests of the House or Senate against the president because the group didn’t constitute a majority in the legislature and couldn’t represent Congress as a whole.”
The judges also wrote:
“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not—indeed we cannot—participate in this debate.”
The lawmakers filed the lawsuit in June 2017. Professor Jacobson wrote at that time, “In a rational world, this lawsuit would have zero chance of success.”
Filed in 2017 The three judges ruled unanimously. They agreed “the lawmakers didn’t have legal standing to proceed with their claims.”
In the meantime lawyers made much more than Trump ever could have profited from any hotel room being stayed in.
If you’ve been to a presidential library you’ve seen many things that would have qualified as emoluments had they been kept by the Presidents or their wives.
I visited the Nixon and Reagan Libraries in CA.
Both were chock full of jewelry, gowns, art and more, all gifts from foreign powers.
IF Nancy or Pat had kept even one of them it would fall under the breaking the emoluments clause.
But they didn’t.
Now, fast-forward to the Trump presidency.
He’s a real estate mogul with both hotels and golf course estates.
Customers rent out sleeping rooms, tee times, and also conference rooms and ballrooms.
Those payments are NOT emoluments.
The CUSTOMERS are getting to use the property in exchange for their money.
Everything is up front and in writing.
Not like giving a Democrat running for president a vacation home IN EXCHANGE for dropping out and endorsing Hillary.
See the difference?
@kitt: And how many of these “legislators” are part of those law firms?
I guess these Democrats will just have to go “waaa, waaa, waaa” all the way home.
It looks like Trump just keeps winning and the Dems just keep posing. Maybe greggie is their legal council!
@Randy: “…we did approach John Bolton’s counsel, asked if Mr. Bolton would be willing to submit an affidavit under oath, describing what he observed in terms of the President’s Ukraine misconduct, and he refused.” -Rep. Adam Schiff pic.twitter.com/74uYvxFrqc
— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) February 6, 2020
So now they say boycott his book
Whaaaa happen, I thought Bolton wanted to testify.
I hope the Democrats lose more then this idiotic Lawsuit their the ones trying to replace our Constitution with various UN Treaties