U.S. appeals court grants Trump request for halt to emoluments case

[JacksinPA]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...est-for-halt-to-emoluments-case-idUSKCN1OJ30R

(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Thursday halted a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of violating anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution, saying it would review crucial preliminary rulings that allowed the case to proceed.

The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it would review a set of lower court rulings that allowed Democratic attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia to move forward with the case.
===========================================
Typical lawyers & judges. But Trump is in clear violation of this clause. This case should proceed.

 

[Chomsky]

I find it interesting that while the court has decided it needs to review the documents from the lower court, it still suspended the earlier ruling.

It would seem to me if the current court wasn't sure to the point of needing to review the earlier court's documents, the earlier ruling should stand until a flaw is found in its ruling - if there are even any to be found.

 

[Mr Person]

I find it interesting that while the court has decided it needs to review the documents from the lower court, it still suspended the earlier ruling.

It would seem to me if the current court wasn't sure to the point of needing to review the earlier court's documents, the earlier ruling should stand until a flaw is found in its ruling - if there are even any to be found.

I've forgotten the ins-and-outs of most civil stuff, but I'm reasonably confident there are some preliminary/pretrial rulings that can be appealed before you actually get to the trial stage. Depending on the specifics, it may make sense for the appellate court to stay proceedings. I'll go out on even shakier ground and guesstimate that considerations like the plaintiff's likelihood of success and cost to defendant in continuing to prepare for trial (or for whatever is coming next, ie, a possible plaintiff summary judgment motion, or even just responding to continuing discovery requests), or some other harm, inform the decision about such an appeallable pretrial order. Or perhaps it's just restricted to situations where circumstances are such that the case cannot be properly heard without the pretrial appeal. Can't remember.

("interlocutory appeals")

 

[Chomsky]

I've forgotten the ins-and-outs of most civil stuff, but I'm reasonably confident there are some preliminary/pretrial rulings that can be appealed before you actually get to the trial stage. Depending on the specifics, it may make sense for the appellate court to stay proceedings. I'll go out on even shakier ground and guesstimate that considerations like the plaintiff's likelihood of success and cost to defendant in continuing to prepare for trial (or for whatever is coming next, ie, a possible plaintiff summary judgment motion, or even just responding to continuing discovery requests), or some other harm, inform the decision about such an appeallable pretrial order. Or perhaps it's just restricted to situations where circumstances are such that the case cannot be properly heard without the pretrial appeal. Can't remember.

("interlocutory appeals")

Thanks.

Yeah - I was forming a higher level overarching general argument, there. I fully expected there are a multitude of diverse legal structures that may apply.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

Thanks.

Yeah - I was forming a higher level overarching general argument, there. I fully expected there are a multitude of diverse legal structures that may apply.

It is entirely possible that someone failed to say "Mother may I" before filing. In that case, it completely exonerates the president, his family members, closest associates, as well as anyone who has ever been accused of looking like Trump. Witch hunt! No collusion!