The question regarding this lawsuit: is Trump violating the spirit or letter of the law according to Democrats?
Depending upon how the law is interpreted, Dems charge that Trump is already in violation.
“logic is that the clause prohibits Trump from taking any money at all from a foreign state. To them, the clause prohibits not just straight-up gifts but also payments for services rendered. So it would prohibit a Trump-owned hotel from renting a ballroom to a foreign embassy and prohibit Trump Tower from renting out office space — as it already does — to a state-controlled Chinese bank.”
According to Trump, he has already divested his entire business to his sons, so he is not in violation.
Democrats of the US Congress have decided to act to force the republican President Donald Trump to comply with the US Constitution with regards to its “Emolument’s Clause.”
There are House republicans who argue that this clause has never been enforced against a sitting US president or the members of the US Congress. The obvious retort to this assertion is that previous presidents have fully complied with the intent of this clause. And the US Congress representatives are bound by the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act to prevent it from acting counter to the emoluments clause.”
The Heritage Guide to the US Constitution states the following:
“The Framers intended the Emoluments Clause to protect the republican character of American political institutions. “One of the weak sides of republics, among their numerous advantages, is that they afford too easy an inlet to foreign corruption.” The Federalist No. 22 (Alexander Hamilton). The…
View original post 906 more words