The emoluments case just went of like an exploding cigar in the face of hopeful liberals. A Federal judge just handed the complainants their hats and invited them to take their case and leave. They were hoping to get at President Donald Trump and his private holdings. The case is not over, but this was a setback for their cause. The Judge explains why they have no standing. Will he be upheld?
As Written By Thomas Lifson for the American Thinker:
Another exploding cigar just detonated in the face of the left. David A. Fahrenthod and Jonathan O’Connell explain in the Washington Post:
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit Thursday alleging that President Trump violated the Constitution’s emoluments clause because his hotels and restaurants do business with foreign governments while he is in office.
The plaintiffs argued that because Trump properties rent out hotel rooms and meeting spaces to other governments, the president was violating a constitutional provision that bans the acceptance of foreign emoluments, or gifts from foreign powers
This is ridiculous on its face, because a market exchange of money for goods and services is not a gift. But the judge never even had to touch upon this absurdity, because he chose an even more devastating basis for throwing the lawsuit out of court:
But Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District of New York ruled that the plaintiffs, led by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), lacked standing to bring such a case, saying it was up to Congress to prevent the president from accepting emoluments.
CREW said it plans to appeal the verdict.
“As the only political branch with the power to consent to violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause, Congress is the appropriate body to determine whether, and to what extent, Defendant’s conduct unlawfully infringes on that power,” Daniels wrote in his ruling.
THERE IS WAY MORE HERE KEEP READING: