Posted on 02/07/2020 7:36:20 AM PST by yesthatjallen
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.
A three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday said in a 12-page decision that the dispute centering around the Constitution's emoluments clauses has no place in the court system.
"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."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Still WINNING.
They’ll have something else up their sleeve.
More WINNING!
Never gets old.
More WINNING! Democrats getting even angrier. Music to my ears.
The Court should have cited all of them with Abuse of Process and referred them to the BAR association for disciplinary actions.
This has been one bad week for the democrats.
Awesome. I love that quote and have little regard for my Maryland AG who wasted precious resources on this case.
I’ve got a (liberal) buddy that foes on and on aboutthe emoluments. My understanding (I believe I read it somewhere) is that profits from Trump’s properties that host foreign dignitaries are given to the treasury. Am I wrong? Is there anything to this emoluments complaint?
Personally, I’m guessing that whatever the dollar amount is doesn’t come to much and considering that the president doesn’t take a salary, I don’t care if visitors stay at his hotel.
So, the redress for such and accusation ( however frivolous and irrational) is....impeachment.
Does anyone suppose that every president has divested themselves of any and all business interests IOT hold the office of president? Yeah, me neither.
However, use of shell foundations etc has been well documented by such personalities holding high office such as SOS Clinton. Yeah, one standard of behavior for them, another for others.
Anyway, it seems that an “emolument” is not simply a remote business dealing that in some indirect manner results in income or profit of an office holder, but rather an obvious and apparent payment from one principal (or its agent) to another (or its agent).
Would anyone think for a moment that say, Bob Dole, who was a major owner of a large corporation, indirectly received income from a large order of products ordered by a food processor in say, China or wherever, that that indirect and unsolicited business transaction was a violation of the emoluments clause? Nah. But maybe today, if a foreign diplomat stays at a Trump company owned hotel, that that is a high crime? Hmmm. Doesn’t pass the smell test.
Glad the court sees through it. They don’t even have standing! So, who does? ( assuming that such a violation were to take place?)
A bad week getting worse. Now if they rule they can’t see his tax returns.
Earning a profit while running a business isn't taking money from foreign agents as a gift.
It's abused it was ever allowed to be filed.
A majority of the federal judiciary has a political axe to grind against Trump. They have the power and they are eager to use it.
The courts are part of the resistance.
Hearing loud explosions. Yep. Heads exploding all about the town. What a mess
The first part of the article said the case was thrown out on standing, but the quote states that the court “cannot participate in this debate”, which sounds like the political question doctrine.
These two grounds have different implications. If there’s a standing problem, well, maybe there is someone who DOES have standing that could be convinced to file suit. If the court determines that it is political question, which the courts are not empowered to decide (as opposed to a legal question, which is the kind that courts are empowered to decide) then the courtroom door is barred to anyone and everyone.
This might be clarified further in the article, but it is another example of “journalists” dealing with very slightly complex issues failing to set them forth clearly.
The WINNING must continue.
RELENTLESSLY.
The domestic enemies have learned NOTHING from their defeats.
The left considered this one of their last and best chance to take down Trump.
Good to see a losers name in the loser column.
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.