Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Democrats were speechless.

Top members of Congress thought they had a sure-fire winner on their hands to destroy President Trump.

But then Ruth Bader Ginsburg just handed down Trump one bombshell victory.

Democrats were not just hoping to use the Mueller report and the Ukraine hoax to impeach President Trump.

In fact, Congressional Democrats filed a number of lawsuits they hoped would blossom into massive scandals that Nancy Pelosi and her allies could use as the basis for articles of impeachment.

One of those court battles was initiated by Democrat members of the House and Senate alleging the President violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution.

The emoluments clause prevents the President from accepting a gift or title of nobility from a foreign government and Democrats claimed that Trump violated this provision by accepting foreign business at his various real estate properties.

But the Washington, D.C Circuit Court of Appeals tossed the Democrats’ case.

Not only did the Democrats lose the case, but the judges rubbed salt in the wound by citing a 2019 opinion authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg to explain why they were tossing the Democrats’ case.

In a 2019 opinion in Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, Ginsburg wrote for the majority that a single House of the Virginia legislature lacked standing to sue on behalf of the entire state.

“Thus, in its motion to intervene, the House observed that it was ‘the legislative body that actually drew the redistricting plan at issue,’ and argued that the existing parties—including the State Defendants—could not adequately protect its interests.” Ginsberg continued, “Nowhere in its motion did the House suggest it was intervening as agent of the State. That silence undermines the House’s attempt to proceed before us on behalf of the State.”

“In short, Virginia would rather stop than fight on. One House of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process,” Ginsburg argued.

In the emoluments clause case, judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals simply applied the precedent set by Ginsburg in Bethune-Hill and told the individual Democrats in Congress suing the President over the emoluments clause to take a hike because they lacked standing to sue in the first place.

“Our conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the president’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the judges argued.

Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal – a frequent target of the President’s bards due to Blumenthal lying about serving in Vietnam – later whined about the defeat.

“I am deeply disappointed and alarmed by this decision,” Blumenthal ranted. “This dismaying decision adds to the already widespread fear that the checks on unbridled presidential power, corruption, and self-enrichment have been seriously undermined.”

But Blumenthal held out hope Democrats could eventually weaponize the emoluments clause against the President because this decision only settled the issue of standing and did not address the merits of the Democrats’ arguments.

American Patriot Daily will keep you up to date any new developments in this ongoing story.