Posted on 02/07/2020 7:43:42 AM PST by rdl6989
A federal appeals court in Washington threw out a lawsuit accusing President Trump of illegally profiting off his private businesses while in office, ruling that the Democratic lawmakers who brought the suit lack standing to bring the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
If there was holder of a Federal Office who should have been nailed for violating the Emoluments Clause it was Hilary Clinton.
Good to hear. It was funny to hear the liberals saY he violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution. It was funny that people who have no clue what emoluments means, were convinced Trump was in violation of same, because they heard some talking heads on MSNBC say so.
It does make me wonder though. If Congress can’t sue.. who can? If Congress could what relief could they expect to get? It seems that it always comes back around to impeachment as the only legal remedy for a runaway President.
Mind you I’m not saying the President is breeching the clause, just wondering aloud.
Good, especially since no one had standing to object to the Kenyanesian Usurpation.
Awesome news!
” It seems that it always comes back around to impeachment as the only legal remedy for a runaway President.”
Yea, I think that was the intent - so that Congress has to have some skin in the game if they want to go after the president.
You have to admit, our founders were BRILLIANT.
Cue Nelson with the ‘HA HA!’ meme!...that’s gotta frost their cake
could we the people then sue to have congress people removed from office under the fourteenth amendment section 3?
sign me up.
Not Tired of Winning Yet !!!!
DOH! x 10!
You can almost feel the sadness at CNN.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/emoluments-lawsuit-trump/index.html
There is no logical basis for distinguishing between Obama getting book royalties from sales to government entities in China, and the Democrats’ complaints about Trump.
NO STANDING! Paybacks a bit$h………...
Yep, and it’s nothing personal..we will pray for them all.
As far as I know, in order to pursue a lawsuit like this the plaintiffs have to demonstrate: (1) that they've suffered some kind of harm from the defendant's actions, and (2) they have no other remedies outside a Federal court to deal with the situation.
Surely Congress would fail on Item (1) and would have their standing severely impaired on Item (2). A more viable group of plaintiffs would be the owners of competing properties who could demonstrate that they've lost business because Trump is using the power of the presidency to steal their customers. Those plaintiffs simply don't exist.
This is why most lawsuits between different branches of government fail, by the way.
OK, now we know...what the basis for the next impeachment effort will be. I had been wondering, but no longer. This is it, give it a few weeks at most and the crazies will be at it again.
“...The case was brought in 2017 by more than 200 Democratic senators and House members...”
ALL 200 members of the Senate and some House members! /s
Urinalism today, on display.
PROOF read before printing! Even FR has a “PREVIEW” function.
For MANY of you, the PREVIEW function is 3 places below the comment box
Tagline: (optional, printed after your name on post):
Your tagline if any ex: Just the facts, ma’am, Just the facts
A row of 3 large boxes with the words Spell “Preview” Post followed by a checkbox for “I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition”
Many of you have no problem finding this little check box, but can’t seem to find the YUGE Preview box.
That is all.
ps meant in good humour (sic). “Kidding on the square”.
The court said Congress can sue—but only if the suit is brought by a majority from the House or Senate.
Just wait, Crazy Nancy will marshall a vote in the House and they’ll try again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.