29

"Solicit" means "ask for". A solicitation can be refused, and it is still a solicitation. That's why the law says "solicit, accept, or receive".


9

@Dale M is basically correct, but fudges a bit on the process. The court issuing the order would issue an order to show cause to a government official who is alleged by the person who sought the order to have violated the order after having received legal notice (i.e. service) of the order. If that individual fails to appear at the appointed time and place ...


7

Does the Special Counsel's non traditional prosecutorial decision making put the president above the law since he is unable to be prosecuted? All federal government employees, including the Special Counsel, are required to conform to the interpretations of the law provided by the Office of Legal Counsel in the absence of a directly applicable court ...


6

An executive order is a way of memorializing in writing Presidential authority that is either expressly granted to the President by the constitution or statute, or is left to President by implication either from a lack of guidance or as a result of the structure of the constitution and historical precedent. Congress has wide discretion to legislate in a ...


5

The ability to create such an office derives (according to Roosevelt, who invoked the power), from the constitutional authority of the president and the Trading with the Enemy Act amended by the War Powers Act, 1941. A president cannot repeal a part of The Constitution or an act of Congress, but he can undo an act by a president (as long as Congress hasn't ...


3

In short, no, that cant be a pardon for those police officers who would be now influenced to take more violent actions towards those they detain. Pardons are only applicable to past actions. You may be pardoned before charges are filed, but the actions must have already occured. Though I less certain about this, simply because Ive never heard such a thing ...


3

No. The scope of Medicare is established by statute which must be amended with a statute approved by Congress and signed by the President, or approved after being vetoed by the President with a veto override, to be changed. The age limitation is set forth at 42 U.S.C. 1395c: The insurance program for which entitlement is established by sections 226 ...


2

Anybody can ask the courts to remedy a legal or Constitutional issue regarding the president, if they feel it has harmed them. People sue the president and other executive branch officials all the time. Members of Congress have this right just like everybody else. This lawsuit isn't alleging "high crimes and misdemeanors" and it's not seeking the ...


2

One example is the law passed by Congress 21 USC 841 which prohibits production, sale or possession of marijuana: prosecutions have been suspended at the federal level by executive-branch decision, in certain states (Washington, Colorado, others no doubt). Obama indicated at the time that such prosecutions were not high priority, a determination that is ...


2

Many executive branch enforcement/implementation decisions are discretionary, but not all of them. When implementation is mandatory, a writ of mandamus can be filed to carry out the act. For example, the executive branch has a non-discretionary duty to release people from prison when their sentence expires and must carry out that law. But, the executive ...


2

The premise that "CEO then has ABC hire XYZ as a consultant, paying XYZ $10mm per year" suggests that the board of directors is unaware of the CEO's ownership of XYZ. That almost always amounts to fraud and conflict of interest. The CEO in the hypothetical situation you describe failed his ethical (if not contractual) duty to timely disclose to ABC his ...


2

The normal course of events for a person who defies a court order is that the court would issue a warrant for their arrest for contempt. This warrant would then be executed by the relevant law enforcement agency (US Marshals, FBI, local police, whatever) and the person would be placed in jail until they agreed to comply with the order. In the case of an ...


2

There is a very detailed definition of "solicit" in 11 CFR § 110.20 - Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510): (6) Solicit has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(m). where 11 CFR 300.2(m) is: To solicit. For the purposes of part 300, to ...


2

Based on 5 U.S. Code Section 3345, Matthew Whitaker appears to fulfill the criteria for subsection (a)(3): notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer or employee of such Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity, subject to the time ...


2

It depends upon the relief sought. If the relief sought is an injunction seeking the violator from continuing to engage in an emolument generating activity going forward, it would be moot and dismissed when the violator left office. If the relief sought is, for example, an award of money damages related to emoluments already received by the violator, ...


1

The appeals court decision only stated that the members of congress suing the President didn't have standing as individual members of congress because "Only an institution can assert an institutional injury". It didn't say that violating the Emoluments Clause was institutional wrong that must be addressed by institutions, it said that a claim that an ...


1

Illinois has a law governing strikes by public education employees. That law has various procedural requirements, and unfair labor practices by either side are prohibited. §16 allows an aggrieved party to apply for judicial review. In that case, the appellate court could order the strike to end (if there is a legal basis for that). That is, a judge can (...


1

It's a tricky question, but there is analysis from people more competent than me available at the New York Times and Lawfare.


1

Such a situation is at best ethically dubious. It is clearly a conflict of interest on the part of the CEO. If it is hidden from the board of directors it may well be fraud, and thus criminal. If it is disclosed somewhere in the documents submitted, but not obviously, it might not be fraud, but is still a violation of the CEO's duty to clearly disclose any ...


1

Torture is defined at 18 USC 2340, and the law against torture is 18 USC 2340A. It is never illegal to give the government advice, just as it is not illegal to make a ridiculously false claim (there seems to be a popular belief that saying false things is against the law, which is a stunningly ironic belief). The only way to tell if the actions constituted ...


1

Whether or not any order is "really" legislation from the Executive branch is a matter of opinion and interpretation, just as it is a matter of opinion and interpretation as to whether court rulings are "really" legislation. There is an essential difference between legislation and other forms of law-making, that regulations must be under specific ...


1

The Office of Alien Property Custodian (APC) morphed into and became The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). The Treasury website as well as Wikipedia explain it. You can find OFAC here https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Pages/Office-of-Foreign-Assets-Control.aspx Such an Office will always be necessary as long as the U....


1

TIME says it would be a first, so there's no clear precedent. CNN's fact-checker says there are no obstacles (beyond the obvious requirement of getting elected first): The US Attorney General does have the authority to appoint a special prosecutor, according to Stephen Vladeck, a CNN legal contributor and law professor with the University of Texas School ...


1

There have been plenty of cases where I judge has said "Sorry, guys; I own ten shares of company XYZ so I can't hear a case where XYZ is involved". Even when in practice it's obvious that the share price of XYZ isn't going to move if the judge decides that XYZ has to repair your fridge under warranty or not. But a judge gets a salary, and that salary is ...


1

In most modern democratic countries, the government is divided into three independent branches: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary and each is independent of the other. When someone is prosecuted for a crime (or in a civil suit by the government) it is the executive branch (usually through the office of the Attorney General) that acts as ...


1

(US Centric answer) You are absolutely right about there being the potential for a conflict of interest. This is why trials are public, defendants are guaranteed counsel / representation, and the defendant has a right to a trial by a jury of his peers. As others have pointed out, there are appeals that further reduce the likelihood of falling through the ...


1

Wait a minute, what are you actually referring to? Do you mean “salaries” in the word “Money”? The one who do the prosecution is the Department of Justice, while the judge is from the Judiciary. So, judge receives salaries from the Judiciary but not the Department of Justice. We maintain the judge is making verdicts fairly by making judges a Permanent ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible