you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 94 points 2 years ago (3 children)

For those wondering why this is a big deal:

US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8:

"no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

Emolument:

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/emolument#Noun

emolument (plural emoluments)

(formal) Payment for employment or an office; compensation for a job, which is usually monetary. synonyms ▲quotations ▼Synonyms: compensation, fee, payment, remuneration

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I wonder how this will go down in court. It clearly says "person" and the money was paid to a corporation. Trump's businesses aren't holding any office, therefore the constitution wasn't violated. That's obviously horse shit, but they're arguing that the presidency isn't an office (CO ballot case). So if they win that it seems likely SCOTUS will drop a nuke on the emoluments clause too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    According to Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, Corporations are people. So lets put it to the test. If you can give unlimited campaign contributions to a PAC through a corporations, than a corporation, and it's executives, would equally be liable under the law for violating the constitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment