[Almondjoy]

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.

[BobL]

” 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.

[teeman8r]

could we the people then sue to have congress people removed from office under the fourteenth amendment section 3?

sign me up.

[jimtorr]

The three judge panel said that it was not Congress who was suing. While the Plaintiffs were over 200 members OF Congress, The unanimous D.C. Circuit panel said in its decision that the members lacked standing because they did not comprise a majority of either the Senate or House when they filed the lawsuit and therefore did not represent either chamber.

[Alberta's Child]

It does make me wonder though. If Congress can’t sue.. who can? If Congress could what relief could they expect to get?

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.

[5by5]

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.

[jimfree]

Who has standing is a good question. State and local government do not according to this decision. Please note that the Emoluments Clause has no implementing statute that might define who may sue and what consequences might result. Compare to the Impeachment Clause that is self-implementing. Treason is more tightly defined in the Constitution than emoluments.

[kiryandil]

Mind you I’m not saying the President is breeching the clause, just wondering aloud.

And speaking of breeches, there's been a lot of soiling of breeches on the Democrat side of the aisle this week, including Granny Wine Box cr@pping herself at the State Of The Union.

[lurk]

It does make me wonder though. If Congress can’t sue.. who can?

................................
The court did not say that Congress can’t sue. They just said that Congress does not have standing in this case.

Congress, as just demonstrated in the impeachment, can be emotional, impulsive, petty and malicious. The law protects the Judiciary and the Executive from hostile incursions.