The Title of Nobility Clause is a provision in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution; it is commonly referred to as The Emoluments Clause. This portion of the United States Constitution has long been moot since precedence has been for every President, beginning with Lyndon B. Johnson, to use a blind trust in order to guarantee that there would never be any conflict of interest or appearance of such.

It states:
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.
It is really very clear, and yet, many of my fellow Americans, the GOP led Congress, conservative media, and especially Donald J. Trump seem unable to grasp what this plainly written text means.

I am a Progressive Democrat. I’ll just admit to that up-front, so there is no confusion. I also hold a degree in Education with my emphasis being Policy. I am a married woman, with five children, who cares deeply about social justice issues. Government and Civics were my “fun” class; I am definitely a political geek. I have always enjoyed a rousing debate, and have often walked away from a night of lively discussion with a genuine “let’s agree to disagree”.

However, there is one topic that I believe, and most Americans do as well, that there can be no compromise on: the sanctity of The Constitution. It is not up for debate. It can be interpreted, not compromised on.

Our Founding Fathers were exceedingly worried, based on experiences and history, that if allowed, a foreign power could effectively influence our republic for their own interest. Harold O’Grady at the Brooklyn Law School wrote an excellent article, in it he says:
Like several other provisions of the Constitution, the Emoluments Clause also embodies the memory of the epochal constitutional struggles in seventeenth-century Britain between the forces of Parliament and the Stuart dynasty. St. George Tucker’s explanation of the clause noted that “in the reign of Charles the Second of England, that prince, and almost all his officers of state were either actual pensioners of the court of France, or supposed to be under its influence, directly, or indirectly, from that cause. The reign of that monarch has been, accordingly, proverbially disgraceful to his memory.” As these remarks imply, the clause was directed not merely at American diplomats serving abroad, but more generally at officials throughout the federal government. 
So, it has been seen to be a portion of the Constitution, not just geared toward keeping our officials from accumulating wealth through office, but to protect against our government actors being influenced by foreign powers.

Before Mr. Trump (or as I like to call him, Commandant Marmalade) was the official Republican nominee, I had grave issue with him as President of the United States. I do not like politicians that keep secrets. I was baffled that he was gaining traction when the United States voters were being kept in the dark and not shown ANY tax returns. That, alone, was reason enough for me to be concerned. Remember how I told you I was a politics geek? Well, this was the issue I brought up time and time again with my conservative friends, AND NONE OF THEM CARED. I just do not understand.

A president decides who is in charge of everything. Infrastructure, defense, THE WALL, oversees private military, so many other aspects of our nation’s budget – the things OUR TAX DOLLARS pay for; without tax returns, we have no knowledge of whether that money is going to filter back into our POTUS’s pocket. HOW IS THAT OKAY? Well, it is not; but too many Americans do not know enough about our political system, our budget, and our very real issues, to vote intelligently. Instead, many in this nation continue to vote one issue. We, as a nation, need to step back and look at the whole picture. We must stop voting against our own interests and we MUST take the time to educate ourselves on ALL the issues we have before us.

Those that put Commandant Marmalade in office will have to live with their decision. As more and more connections come to light with Russia, I hope this nation’s citizenry puts the pressure on Congress to move forward with impeachment hearings. It is obvious that our POTUS is influenced by a foreign power, and that is a clear violation of our Constitution.

For those reading this that lean to the right on our political spectrum, I urge you to read what two former REPUBLICAN White House Ethics Lawyers have written on this issue. Their credentials are flawless.

Norman L. Eisen, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, was the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2009 to 2011 and ambassador to the Czech Republic from 2011 to 2014. He is the chair of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Richard W. Painter, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, was the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007. He is the vice chair of CREW. Laurence H. Tribe is the Carl M. Loeb University Professor and Professor of Constitutional Law at Harvard University.
Today's A to Z Challenge post brought to you by the letter...


  1. People, on the whole, are stupid. Not only do they not know things, they don't care that they don't know things because they believe they know enough. Or, conversely, that knowing things is bad ("that's your education talking"). So, no, they didn't even know "emoluments" was a word until it popped up recently and, because they didn't know, they think it's liberal trick and that they don't need to know anything about it.
    Ivanka's not the only one who doesn't know what complicit means.

    1. I think we should be friends! We could have a great talk over pints at the pub. ;)

      I do hope that at some point, very soon, our culture returns to the point where being educated or "elite" is a GOAL all Americans strive toward.


Post a Comment