That’s insane. They’re not moot. He still has the money. When any other federal employee violates the emoluments clause they have to forfeit the money. https://t.co/09kAERxBB7
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 25, 2021
A justice system that let's a defendant run out the clock to avoid judgment is not just.
— Jill Wine-Banks (@JillWineBanks) January 25, 2021
Supreme Court Ends Emoluments Suits Against Trump https://t.co/nMwe9zb6H9
BREAKING: Supreme Court dismisses as moot lawsuits over whether Donald Trump illegally profited off his presidency by accepting payments from foreign and domestic officials who stayed at the Trump International Hotel. https://t.co/1PSsXKP1g0
— The Associated Press (@AP) January 25, 2021
Our statement on the Supreme Court's Emoluments decision:https://t.co/zZ2L3ng6T5
— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) January 25, 2021
Trump spent four years unsuccessfully trying to shake lawsuits that accused him of unconstitutionally benefitting from his businesses as president. By losing the White House, he finally won.
— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) January 25, 2021
On today's SCOTUS action and the end of the emoluments cases: https://t.co/sftHks0CuB
I am aware that this is how common law works, but it seems weird to have the rule be that any time a new president is elected he can violate the emoluments clause and then stall litigation until he's out of office and we never get a precedent. https://t.co/hwKMDqboAw
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) January 25, 2021
A couple of things here:
— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) January 25, 2021
* Roberts likes dismissing things in this way.
* CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT, and pass legislation about what "emoluments" means, and what is prohibited. That's the only want to prevent Trump-style graft in the future. https://t.co/8bDi3unJWb
Statement by Attorneys General Frosh and Racine on Conclusion of Emoluments Lawsuit: pic.twitter.com/fKv8bNpsyu
— Brian Frosh (@BrianFrosh) January 25, 2021
