Rule of Law

Appeals court determines Blumenthal, other Democrats lack standing to sue Trump

“The Court of Appeals did not in any way approve of President Trump’s repeated and flagrant violations of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause.” — CAC President Elizabeth Wydra

A federal appeals court on Friday threw out U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s legal challenge of President Donald Trump, a lawsuit that alleged the president is improperly profiting from his position.

The Connecticut senator is the lead plaintiff in Blumenthal v. Trump, a case brought by more than 200 Democratic lawmakers who sued Trump, arguing that Congress has the right to approve — or withhold — consent before the president accepts payments or benefits from foreign governments.

But a three-judge panel on the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia said Democrats who brought the lawsuit, based on the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution, had no standing to sue because they did not represent a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate.

“Here, regardless of rigor, our conclusion is straightforward because the members—29 Senators and 186 members of the House of Representatives—do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the opinion reads.

Blumenthal said “I am deeply disappointed and alarmed by this decision.”

“This dismaying decision adds to the already widespread fear that the checks on unbridled presidential power, corruption, and self-enrichment have been seriously undermined,” Blumenthal said.

The senator also left open the possibility of an appeal to the Supreme Court.

“As we evaluate next steps, we remain fully committed to doing everything in our power to hold President Trump accountable for his unacceptable, unconstitutional misconduct,” Blumenthal said.

The judges only ruled on the issue of whether the members had standing. They did not rule on a district court’s earlier finding that the Democrats had a cause of action and a claim against the president.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not—indeed we cannot—participate in this debate.”

The non-profit Constitutional Accountability Center represented the lawmakers in Blumenthal v Trump.

“While we are disappointed in the panel’s decision and are in active discussions with our clients as they consider their next steps, it is important to recognize that today’s ruling is not a decision on the merits,” said Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra. “The Court of Appeals did not in any way approve of President Trump’s repeated and flagrant violations of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause.”

Trump reacted through Twitter, a favorite form of expression.

“Another win just in,” the president tweeted. “Nervous Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress sued me, thrown out. This one unanimous, in the D.C. Circuit. Witch Hunt!”

###

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
July 25, 2024

USA: ‘The framers of the constitution envisioned an accountable president, not a king above the law’

CIVICUS
CIVICUS discusses the recent US Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity and its potential impact...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
July 19, 2024

US Supreme Court is making it harder to sue – even for conservatives

Reuters
July 19 (Reuters) - Over its past two terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has put an end...
By: David H. Gans, Andrew Chung
Rule of Law
July 18, 2024

RELEASE: Sixth Circuit Panel Grapples with Effect of Supreme Court’s Loper Bright Decision on Title X Regulation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
July 17, 2024

Family Planning Fight Poised to Test Scope of Chevron Rollback

Bloomberg Law
Justices made clear prior Chevron-based decisions would stand Interpretations of ambiguous laws no longer given deference...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Mary Anne Pazanowski
Rule of Law
July 15, 2024

Not Above the Law Coalition On Judge Cannon Inappropriately Dismissing Classified Documents Case Against Trump

WASHINGTON — Today, following reports that Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the classified documents case against...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
July 15, 2024

Federal judge dismisses Trump classified documents criminal case

Kansas Reflector
MILWAUKEE — The federal classified documents case against former President Donald Trump was dismissed Monday...
By: Praveen Fernandes, Ashley Murray