The suit against Trump, brought by Maryland and Washington, D.C., claims that the president is violating the Constitution's foreign and domestic
emoluments clauses by accepting payments from foreign governments and states through his business empire.
A federal judge in Maryland has ruled that Maryland and Washington, D.C., have standing to pursue a narrowed claim in their lawsuit contending that President Donald Trump is violating the Constitution's foreign and domestic
emoluments clauses by accepting payments from foreign governments and states through his business empire.
While he'd planned to cover familiar historical cases such as Marbury v. Madison and more recent cases such as Obergefell v. Hodges for his Beijing students this past spring, he found that his students were captivated
by the travel ban litigation and
emoluments clause lawsuits against President Donald Trump's administration.
Over the past year I've written about the
Emoluments Clause; the No Religious Tests clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure case; the meaning of the oath of office; how the Appropriations Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to
Clause; the No Religious Tests
clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure case; the meaning of the oath of office; how the Appropriations Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to
clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure case; the meaning of the oath of office; how the Appropriations
Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to
Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering
by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts
Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to
Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to list.