US Supreme Court Cancels Claims Against Trump

JAKARTA - The United States (US) Supreme Court canceled a case of constitutional violations by former US President Donald Trump regarding the president's prohibition of taking advantage of foreign governments. The court instructed the lower courts to remove opinions previously opposed to Trump because he was no longer in office.

This leaves new, unresolved questions raised in this case. Trump continues to maintain an interest in his business and let it take advantage of foreign and domestic governments.

CNN reported Tuesday, January 26, there are two charges against Trump. The first one was initiated by a team of lawyers in Maryland and Washington DC. They claim Trump violated the constitution by accepting payments from foreign and domestic governments through the Trump International Hotel.

They say that they are at a disadvantage in competitive business from foreign and state officials who may choose to do business with entities in which the president has a financial interest.

The second case was filed by various members of the hospitality industry who own or work in hotels or restaurants in New York and Washington DC. They also claim that they are placed at a disadvantage in competition.

Deepak Gupta, one of the lawyers who challenged Trump in the dispute, said on Twitter he was not surprised the case was dismissed after Trump left the White House. He added that "unfortunately Trump is running out of time."

"I am proud of the work we are doing to ensure the anti-corruption norms in the Constitution are not forgotten," he wrote.

The Citizens' Group for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington DC, which had a hand in the case against Trump, said the lawsuit "made the American people aware for four years of the widespread corruption of a president defending global business and benefiting from government payments. foreign and domestic. "

"Only Trump, after losing the presidency and leaving office, puts an end to corrupt constitutional violations and stops these groundbreaking lawsuits," Noah Bookbinder, the group's executive director, said in a statement.

At the center of the case is the Constitution's Emoluments Clause, which has faced little judicial interpretation since it was written nearly 250 years ago.

The Constitution's Emoluments Clause prohibits the president from receiving "honoraria" or benefits from any "King, Prince, or foreign nation" unless Congress allows. The president has the right to receive salaries and benefits pre-determined by Congress, but prohibits him from receiving "any other salary from the United States."

"The Supreme Court procedural order not only abolished the two lower court rulings but also ordered the dissolution of the entire dispute leaving some other time for resolution of many of the questions raised on Trump's behavior," said Steve Vladeck, a Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University's School of Law. Texas.

In court papers, Trump's lawyers have argued for lower courts in cases brought by Maryland and Washington DC. Trump's team of lawyers said the lower court was "fundamentally wrong in allowing this unprecedented lawsuit to proceed" and called the prosecution "debilitating and speculative."

Washington DC Attorney General Karl Racine and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh said in a joint statement that the case "will set a precedent that will help stop others from using the presidency or other federal office for personal financial gain as Trump has done over the past four years."

A former head of the Government Ethics Office Walter Shaub condemned the decision to cancel. He called the decision "absurd" because the honorarium cases were not disputed. The cancellation order was even issued without any comment.

"(Trump) still has money. When there are other federal officials who violate the honorarium clause, they have to lose money," said Shaub.