Posted on 01/27/2017 7:38:39 PM PST by ButThreeLeftsDo
Lately a little-known clause in the Constitution has been making big headlines. It's called the emoluments clause, and it's just 49 words total.
The clause reads in full: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any Present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
The ethics group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) claims President Donald Trump is in violation of that clause, and as a result, they've filed a lawsuit.
"Our organization is suing the president in his official capacity to ask a judge to require the president to stop taking payments from foreign governments and companies controlled by foreign governments in violation of the Constitution," explained CREW Vice Chair Richard Painter, a current University of Minnesota law professor and the former chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush.
The lawsuit claims, "These violations of the foreign emoluments clause pose a grave threat to the United States and its citizens."
"The founders of our country envisioned this threat," Painter said. "What is the point of having a tea party and throwing King George's tea in the Boston Harbor and having a revolution, and then electing a president who's going to be buying and selling tea with King George?" He added, "We worry a lot about jobs in this country and jobs going out of the country. How can we depend upon the president to protect the interests of American workers in trade negotiations, if the president is receiving money from foreign governments while the negotiations are going on?"
But Trump did explain why he and his lawyers do not believe he's in violation of the Constitution at a Jan. 11 press conference.
"No one would've thought when the Constitution was written that paying your hotel bill was an emolument," a lawyer explained.
Painter believes the president and his team are off-base. "If he does not divest himself of ownership in his businesses, then he still has the conflicts of interest, including the foreign government payments that will be to his benefit regardless of who manages the businesses," he said.
Painter also reiterated that he served under George W. Bush, a Republican, and added, "This is not a partisan issue. This is about the United States and the American people."
You mean they ‘deserve’ not ‘ask’ for Rule 11 Sanctions. Right?
Yes, and demand them early.
My approach to litigation was always one of two things, depending on what the other side “deserved.”
If they had legitimate arguable case, my approach was always, “Let’s be adults... and work to find a common ground.... and I will be too unless, in the rare case, your client becomes childish, at which time I will work to destroy your case and your client.”
That attitude, and reputation, moved a lot of cases to reasonable settlements before there was even a filing.
If on the other hand, they opened with foolishness such as this, it was “make the opposition client regret the day their mother first smiled at their father” from day one.
One of my favorite was lis pendens petitions and pre-verdict, even pre-trial demands for certified financial accountings and their last 7 years 1099s from the plaintiff to demonstrate that the P had the financial capability to pay our extensive legal fees that a verdict might well impose on them.
Didn’t get those accountings approved too often, but it always did get the Ps attention, and a lot of dropped cases.
Not only does he not have standing but the USSC has ruled on numerous occasions that these type of cases are purely a political issue that needs to resolved by the legislative and the Executive Branch. The solutions are, (as I see it),; impeachment or a constitutional amendment.
Sitting Presidents are immune to lawsuits. Think about it, if they weren’t immune, fighting lawsuits is all the govt would do.
If he files, he has to file against the US Federal Govt. And they may be the plan, he’s just playing it up as best he can.
No problem. Get the consent of the majority GOP Congress. That is part of the law. 51 votes thanks to Harry Reid.
Brock was out in December.
It has to be profits. Otherwise, every foreign government in the world could book rooms and hold conferences in Trump hotels, filling them and running them into bankruptcy.
i think the senate already ok’d this scenario.
The answer, of course, couldn’t be simpler: he’s a dyed-in-the-wool Leftist and he wants to throw a monkey wrench into the Trump works.
Anythying else is empty rhetoric.
Interesting and insightful. The Trump lawyers should give you a call.
Melania is making progress on her libel case.
I love the way the Trump network fights back, never letting a foe get an inch.
...and if not, we'll advertise for one!
“...and if not, we’ll advertise for one!”
There’s a good deal of truth in that, but I have seen lawyers engaged in righteous missions.
Me too.
key phrase “without the Consent of the Congress”.
Congress has given consent before, enacting the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which authorizes federal employees to accept foreign governmental benefits of various kinds in specific circumstances.
There is bill in the House, sponsored by the RATS, denying congressional consent for Trump.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-joint-resolution/26/titles
Trump should sue him for 10 billion dollars for defamation and about a hundred other suits that will cost him every cent Soros has to defend him.
Universidad of Mexico? Undead of Munchkinland?
Trump is right.
Paying bills for services are not emoluments.
Our first presidents did not sell off their businesses whn president, they returned to them after their terms were over.
Ridiculous.
And from the article I was thinking “Yeah - it would be easy enough for some foreigner to write a check for $500,000 for his one night and mark it as “hotel accommodations”. But in your post you highlight that would be taken into account as a profit.
BTW - I thought all foreigners hated Trump./s Why would they want to give him money, much less stay in a hotel with his name on the front door!?
“Let’s be adults... and work to find a common ground...”
I know a lawyer that was like this. (He made his money and changed careers. He is getting ordained as a Christian Minister soon!)
I recall after one large case was wrapped up (corporate law) and I asked him how it went.
“Well, after all was said and done we arrived at a pretty reasonable compromise. But, well ...
.
.
.
it was a compromise.”
Obama infamously broke this clause twice in a big way (accepting the now-derided award of the Nobel Peace Prize, and sitting as chair of the UNSC) and none of these people said anything. Suddenly they found their copies of the Constitution...
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.