Petitions for certiorari in the other two Emoluments Clause cases remain pending.
At least four judges (and one senior judge) believe the standing question is worthy of en banc review. Will the Supreme Court think it's worth certiorari?
In a brief, direct opinion, the D.C. Circuit concludes that members of Congress lack standing to sue the President alleging a violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause
The Office of Legal Counsel Has Not Shifted Its Position on Whether the Foreign Emoluments Clause Applies to the President. But the Civil Division Has.
DOJ’s Schrödinger’s Briefs in the Emoluments Clauses litigation are in tension with a 2009 OLC Opinion
The Congressional Research Service Has Shifted Its Position on Whether the Foreign Emoluments Clause Applies to the President
CRS has relied on Tillman’s Scholarship about who holds an “Office . . . under” the United States
[I'm delighted that Profs. Josh Blackman and Seth Barrett Tillman, have passed along this response to the recent decision in the Emoluments Clause litigation against President Trump; naturally, I'd be delighted to post a response in turn from their adversaries. -EV]