Mr. trump thinks the Emoluments Clause is phony (well at least it doesn’t apply to him, he’s so very speecial.)
= = = = = = =
Opinion by KARL RACINE, BRIAN FROSH and NORMAN EISEN
Karl Racine is the attorney general for the District of Columbia.
Brian Frosh is the attorney general for Maryland.
Mr. Eisen is their former co-counsel in the emoluments litigation and served as President Obama’s ethics czar. He now serves as outside counsel for the nonpartisan Voter Protection Program.
Three and a half years ago, we took President Donald Trump to court over unconstitutional payments he received from foreign and domestic governments through his hotel in downtown D.C. while serving as president.
Recently, the Supreme Court declared that our lawsuit and Trump’s appeal of it were moot given that President Joe Biden had taken office. Trump’s departure from the White House may have effectively terminated the case against him,
but we still secured a significant victory: Judge Peter J. Messitte of the Maryland federal district court ruled in 2018, the year after we filed suit, that the Constitution forbids the president from receiving anything of value from a foreign or domestic government.
His decision was the first time a court ruled that the Constitution broadly prohibits such transactions, rejecting Trump’s much narrower interpretation that the clause prohibited only transactions involving personal services.
Under this interpretation, Trump would not be able to accept payment if he served as a personal driver to Saudi Arabia’s King Mohammed Bin Salman while in office, but the president’s hotels and businesses would be able to accept millions of dollars in cash from the Saudi leader.)
As a result of Judge Messitte’s decision, the law we made along the way—still in force—set a standard by which all future presidents will be judged. Now Congress must build upon that to broadly preclude future presidential conflicts and self-dealing. …
Seems like old history doesn’t it?
Thing is there’s a rumor going around that Mr.trump’s presidential profiteering will be coming front and center and into the spotlight, in the near future.
“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 returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites, (or bribes, for that matter)
So I figured a little background wouldn’t hurt for future reference.
We shall see.