Judges sets Oct. 18 arguments in Trump foreign emoluments suit
Source: Politico
A lawsuit contending that President Donald Trump's business dealings with and in foreign countries violate the Constitution is set to get a public airing in October in a New York federal courtroom.
U.S. District Court Judge George Daniels issued an order Wednesday setting oral arguments for Oct. 18 on a suit the liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed in January. The suit argues that Trump's business ties run afoul of the Constitution's foreign emoluments clause, which bars federal officials from receiving benefits from foreign governments.
The Justice Department's final response brief in the case is due Sept. 22.
Daniels took over the case last month after Judge Ronnie Abrams recused herself, apparently because her husband accepted a job as a prosecutor on the staff of Robert Mueller, the special counsel probing alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Abrams is an Obama appointee. Daniels is a Clinton appointee.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2017/08/09/trump-emoluments-lawsuit-schedule-241443
Link to tweet
So an Obama appointee got replaced . . . by a Clinton appointee.
Good luck, Prof. Tribe!
Gothmog
(145,800 posts)The court says he has to sell his hotels and golf courses and has to return all "trade marks" for himself, any company in which he's part of full owner granted by foreign countries since he stole the office. OK, they won't say stole but we know they should, lol. Failure to liquidate these within 120 days will cause the court to take over the assets and sell them.
OK, I did say this was my dream. However, I do have a legitimate question. Court says don the con can't do what he's doing and demands the assets be sold to a 3rd uninvolved party. Can they enforce this? He'll just rant but do nothing if there's no big stick to make him do the right and legal thing. I am hoping there's some way to enforce this as that way he'd just quit.
pnwmom
(109,021 posts)Then things will get interesting.
wryter2000
(46,125 posts)But I agree he'd quit.
eggplant
(3,917 posts)wryter2000
(46,125 posts)I don't know the answer to that one, either.
Chrysanthemum
(188 posts)I sort of asked the same thing, but you did so more eloquently!
Chrysanthemum
(188 posts)If this is a civil suit, even if 45 were to resign to continue collecting his foreign-sourced profits, he could still be stuck with a judgment against him because of what's already happened, right?
IA-most definitely-NAL.
Also, I did not know that CREW identifies itself as a "liberal" watchdog group. I just thought they were for responsibility and ethics in Washington. Does this article tacitly assume that caring about responsibility and ethics is a liberal characteristic?
eggplant
(3,917 posts)Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington was co-founded in 2003 by Norman L. Eisen and Melanie Sloan in part as a counter-weight to conservative watchdog groups such as Judicial Watch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_for_Responsibility_and_Ethics_in_Washington
eggplant
(3,917 posts)TryLogic
(1,723 posts)is a liberal phenomenon! It sure as hell is not a right wing phenomenon.