A Pre-Election Update on the Emoluments Clauses Caseshttps://reformclub.blogspot.com/2020/10/a-pre-election-update-on-emoluments.htmlThere have been four Emoluments Clauses cases working their way glacially through the federal courts. Three of the four cases were so-called official-capacity claims—the actual defendant was the United States government. (Trump) was only a nominal defendant—a defendant in name-only. .... Blumenthal v. Trump was one such case. The President prevailed before the D.C. Circuit. Plaintiffs filed a petition for certiorari ... . The Supreme Court DENIED certiorari. And so, that case is now over. The President has prevailed.
There are two other official-capacity cases before the Supreme Court: Trump v. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ... and Trump v. District of Columbia and Maryland ... . In both of these cases, plaintiffs prevailed in the intermediate court of appeals, and the DOJ filed a petition for certiorari. ... In both of these cases, the plaintiffs’ opposition briefs were due in October. ... in both of these cases, the plaintiffs—not the President, not the DOJ—sought extensions, which were granted. The plaintiffs’ briefs are now due after the election. Timely resolution before the election is no longer possible.
The final case, District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump, is the only individual-capacity claim against the President. The President is being defended by private counsel, apparently, at his own expense. It is being heard in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The President’s brief was filed. The plaintiffs’ opposition brief was due in October. ... Here too, plaintiffs sought an extension, which was granted. The plaintiffs’ brief is now due after the election. Timely resolution before the election is no longer possible.
Not only did plaintiffs cause these and other delays, but they complain to the media that Trump has caused the delays. ...
For nearly four years, Plaintiffs have told the story that Trump’s outside business interests are illegal, unconstitutional, a threat to national security, and put the interests of the plaintiffs and nation at real risk. Yet, at every turn, it is Plaintiffs who seek to delay timely judicial review.
It was obvious, at least to those willing to see and acknowledge it, that these were frivolous lawfare suits, intended only to harass Trump, wasting his time, energy, and $$. The plaintiff-requested delays that postpone action on the suits before the USSC and 4th Circuit Court of Appeals were done to preclude decisions until after Election Day. Further proof these lawsuits are frivolous lawfare suits.
