>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dc-and-marylands-lawsuit-trump-flagrantly-violating-emoluments-clause/2017/06/12/8a9806a8-4f9b-11e7-be25-3a519335381c_story.html
>>http://www.npr.org/2017/04/27/525749738/questions-linger-about-trumps-foreign-business-ties-and-the-emoluments-clause
>>https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/12/emoluments-clause-trump-sued-by-maryland-and-dc-attorneys-general.html

Did you read the first paragraph of the WAPO article?

Democratic state attorneys general, a chief roadblock to some of President Trump’s most controversial policies, escalated their campaign against him Monday, alleging in a lawsuit that payments by foreign governments to Trump’s businesses violate anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution.

So the same crowd that procured the pee pee dossier and blocked Trump at every turn and brought previous law suits that eventually had to be overturned by the Supreme Court, has brought their next law suit.

How about this:

"Diplomats from foreign governments and their agents are staying in Trump hotels, like the Trump hotel in D.C.," says Teachout, who is part of the lawsuit. "That's money from foreign governments going into our president's pocket while he is making decisions that affect those countries."

So unless Trump sells his hotels or enforces a hotel border control far more draconian than the one that got blocked in court for being unfair, he's breaching the emoluments clauses?

Here we go again: the catastrophist posturing collapses as soon as you look at the actual provision and its anti-corruption context.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And 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.

The context clearly is to prevent honors, presents, bribes or other potential corruptions of any US official- unless Congress approves same.

If some Prince turned up and forked over $500,000 per night for a Trump hotel room, I'd agree with you that it stinks of disguised present or emolument, where "emolument" is defined as "a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office." I'd say the same if he set up a Trump Foundation into which foreign governments dropped millions purportedly in exchange for nothing, with Trump shortly afterwards finding in the donors' favor. But if a King, Prince or Foreign State pays the going rate for a hotel room in DC? Bearing in mind that Trump donates his whole presidential salary to good causes and a $1M contribution to hurricane victims, must we really believe that a law suit is needed in case a hotel bill he probably never even sees, might corrupt him? If they really believe it, why not ask Congress as the clause clearly intends?

Sorry but in this lawsuit I smell the next dirty trick from serial dirty tricksters, the same sort of swamping that got him elected in the first place. Some people never learn, it seems.