# Could a sitting POTUS be arrested (Rod Blagojevich style) if charged with a crime? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 30, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921 "2013-07-30T17:07:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Donnerwetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Donnerwetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donnerwetter)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/1 "2013-07-30T17:07:16Z")
Would it be at all conceivable that a sitting President of the United States is arrested by law enforcement officers at the White House and then forced to appear before a judge in handcuffs? I am, of course, drawing a parallel to the infamous case of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich: > [@](#): > > The public scandal and turmoil began with arrests of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat, and his Chief of Staff John Harris at 6:15 a.m. on December 9, 2008, at their homes by deputies of the United States Marshals Service on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).[8][9] Blagojevich and Harris were each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and one count of soliciting bribes. > > […] > > After his arrest, Governor Blagojevich appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nan R. Nolan, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and was released on a $4,500 signature bond. He was also ordered to surrender his passport and his firearm owner’s identification card. He then returned to work where his office issued a statement saying the “allegations do nothing to impact the services, duties or function of the State”. Let’s assume the President is accused of a similar crime (i. e. selling off a prestigious office to the highest bidder). Would the legal course of action be somewhat like in the drama surrounding Blagojevich? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/2 "2013-07-30T17:15:14Z")
In such a case, the President would be impeached and removed from office, if he didn’t resign first. Once he was out of office, he might conceivably be arrested on criminal charges, but might not be, too: Nixon wasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/3 "2013-07-30T17:17:15Z")
Judges have required Presidential testimony before, but they’ve never had to use force. Sitting presidents just go testify, doing otherwise isn’t presidential. Or they politely decline to testify, and suggest that everybody else can just go take a walk. That can be presidential if done right. In the hypothetical case of somebody blatantly abusing the office, I think impeachment would happen semi-immediately. And at that point, the perp would be subject to arrest like anybody else. Probably would be released on own reconizance rather than held, he’d still be a hassle as a prisoner. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/4 "2013-07-30T17:45:50Z")
The OP is forgetting the Presidential pardon. It would be political suicide but if the alternative is handcuffs then what would the President have to lose? Issue a pardon for himself, then resign. This would only work once. Congress would immediately attempt to limit future President’s pardon powers. Then the Supreme Court would have the final say. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/5 "2013-07-30T17:48:40Z")
The President can only pardon federal crimes, so if he committed a state crime he couldn’t pardon himself. Of course I don’t know if he can pardon himself in any case. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/6 "2013-07-30T17:48:49Z")
presidential pardon is not available if it’s an allegation of a crime under state law. ---
**Author:** ![Donnerwetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Donnerwetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donnerwetter)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/7 "2013-07-30T17:50:07Z")
The President can pardon **himself**? ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/8 "2013-07-30T17:52:07Z")
AFAIK there’s nothing in the constitution preventing it. It’s never been tested. Hopefully it won’t be. Nixon got Ford to handle his pardon. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/9 "2013-07-30T17:52:41Z")
This honestly isn’t an easily answerable question. Rod Blagojevich was arrested by Federal agents, as part of the Federal executive Rod had no special power over them. However, the President is the Head of State. There is not technically any Federal law enforcement officer that can actually lay hands on him if he orders them not to do so. The military likewise cannot legally act against him. Any Federal officer attempting to arrest him would be derelict in his duties, and the President’s many, many Federal agents who protect him 24/7 would almost certainly use force to stop any rogue Federal officer attempting to affect an arrest. State law enforcement officers would have several things preventing them from effecting an arrest of the President. It is of legal constitutionality for sure, and practically there is no way the Sheriff of some Texas hill county is going to get within a hundred yards of the President with an arrest warrant. In fact, as a matter of history when the courts have in fact ruled that a President does something, and the President has refused to comply–nothing happened. The courts lack authority and ability to actually enforce their rulings. The Presidency is a very powerful office, and the only true check that we know for sure would work against such rogue behavior would be impeachment–as once impeached he is not legally President. That’s most likely what would happen if a President refused to comply with court orders or ran around committing various crimes and using his office to protect himself from prosecution. Most likely the only reason Nixon released the tapes after the court ruling is because he knew he was basically getting impeached if he didn’t. He also recognized shortly thereafter he was getting impeached either way if he didn’t resign, so he resigned. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/10 "2013-07-30T17:53:11Z")
> [@Donnerwetter](#): > > The President can pardon **himself**? “Except in cases of impeachment”, per [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon#United_States). ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/11 "2013-07-30T17:55:08Z")
Short and sweet. > [@](#): > > Article 2 - The Executive Branch > Section 2 - Civilian Power Over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments > \<\\> > The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and **he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.** > He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, ---
**Author:** ![Donnerwetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Donnerwetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donnerwetter)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/12 "2013-07-30T18:09:57Z")
@ aceplace57 But I would have assumed that the clause about impeachment refers to **third persons** (for instance Federal judges who can also be impeached by Congress, the Framers of the Constitution probably thought that the President ought not to be able to override these), but not to the President himself. ---
**Author:** ![obfusciatrist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4af34b/32.png) [@obfusciatrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obfusciatrist)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/13 "2013-07-30T18:20:43Z")
The Office of Legal Counsel has [written on the subject](http://www.justice.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm) in 2000 as a follow up to an analysis done in 1973 related to Spiro Agnew. Essentially it determines that the president is immune from indictment and criminal prosecution. In that case Spiro Agnew was attempting to enjoin a grand jury investigation claiming that it wasn’t allowed against a sitting Vice President. The Solicitor General (Robert Bork) argued that while the president was so protected, it did not extend to the vice president. Analysis seems to be (I didn’t read it all yet) that since a criminal prosecution would require the president’s full attention it would interfere with his constitutionally required duties. So before someone could walk into the White House and arrest him, he’d have to be removed from that position first (obviously by impeachment, but I also wonder if the Vice President could use the 25th Amendment to oust him) avoiding the impeachment process (though not avoiding Congress). ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/14 "2013-07-30T18:24:36Z")
> [@obfusciatrist](#): > > I also wonder if the Vice President could use the 25th Amendment to oust him) avoiding the impeachment process (though not avoiding Congress). Based on the idea the president would be insane to defy a judge? Seems… slightly plausible. > [@Donnerwetter](#): > > @ aceplace57 > > But I would have assumed that the clause about impeachment refers to **third persons** …, but not to the President himself. Doesn’t say that. Why assume? ---
**Author:** ![obfusciatrist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4af34b/32.png) [@obfusciatrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obfusciatrist)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/15 "2013-07-30T18:30:28Z")
Read farther. The 25th Amendment is discussed in one of the footnotes. But in the reverse consideration, did the 25th Amendment break the immunity by creating a process by which a president otherwise bogged down in a prosecution could be declared unable to perform his duties and thus move power to the Vice President (and if resolved in the Presidents power he can be put back) but that was dismissed: > [@](#): > > To be sure, the Twenty-fifth Amendment provides that either the President himself, or the Vice-President along with a majority of the executive branch’s principal officers or some other congressionally determined body, can declare that the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” with the result that the Vice President assumes the status and powers of Acting President. See U.S. Const. amend. XXV, §§ 3, 4. But it is doubtful in the extreme that this Amendment was intended to eliminate or otherwise affect any constitutional immunities the President enjoyed prior to its enactment. None of the contingencies discussed by the Framers of the Twenty-fifth Amendment even alluded to the possibility of a criminal prosecution of a sitting President. Of course, it might be argued that the Twenty-fifth Amendment provides a mechanism to ensuring that, if a sitting President were convicted and imprisoned, there could be a transfer of powers to an Acting President rather than a permanent disabling of the executive branch. But the possibility of Vice-Presidential succession “hardly constitutes an argument in favor of allowing other branches to take actions that would disable the sitting President.” To rationalize the President’s imprisonment on the ground that he can be succeeded by an “Acting” replacement, moreover, is to give insufficient weight to the people’s considered choice as to whom they wish to serve as their chief executive, and to the availability of a politically accountable process of impeachment and removal from office for a President who has engaged in serious criminal misconduct. While the executive branch would continue to function (albeit after a period of serious dislocation), it would still not do so as the people intended, with their elected President at the helm. Thus, we conclude that the Twenty-fifth Amendment should not be understood sub silentio to withdraw a previously established immunity and authorize the imprisonment of a sitting President. Another footnote points out that the 25th Amendment places no definition on what constitutes unable and the debate preceding passage indicated that was intentional to allow for unexpected events. So presumably it is theoretically possible for the President and the Cabinet to decide the president is so mired in controversy that they’ll remove him. Huge constitutional crisis ensues. ---
**Author:** ![Donnerwetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Donnerwetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donnerwetter)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/16 "2013-07-30T18:48:12Z")
> [@aNewLeaf](#): > > \*Originally Posted by Donnerwetter > @ aceplace57 > > But I would have assumed that the clause about impeachment refers to third persons …, but not to the President himself.\* > > Doesn’t say that. Why assume? Common sense. The idea that somebody should be entitled to pardon himself seems crazy. Maybe an ancient Persian King, but not an elected politician in a modern society governed by the rule of law. ---
**Author:** ![obfusciatrist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4af34b/32.png) [@obfusciatrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obfusciatrist)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/17 "2013-07-30T19:00:41Z")
When has being crazy been a bar to something being legal? There was a lot of talk about whether a president could pardon himself when Nixon was having his troubles and then again when Clinton was impeached. In both cases it was news when both publicly decided they would not pursue that action (in Nixon’s case because he felt it would guarantee impeachment so he resigned and then was pardoned). There’s nothing explicit in the Constitution that limits the presidential pardon power so as to exclude himself (there there is general agreement on the it being limited to federal crimes so if he murdered someone that wouldn’t help). So the only way to get an answer would be for the sitting president to commit a crime (or be willing to pardon himself for a crime while claiming he didn’t commit it) and then pardon himself. Then for a prosecutor to risk professional suicide to charge him anyway so that the courts could review. And legal experts seem to disagree on how that would likely play out (deference to the executive to define pardon power absent specific limits vs. appeals to common sense avoidance of paradoxes). ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/18 "2013-07-30T19:37:58Z")
The impeachment process has exactly jack to do with the legal process. It would probably happen, sure, but that’s a decision of statecraft, not law. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/19 "2013-07-30T19:38:10Z")
If the President is in a position to need a pardon, though, it’s probably a case of impeachment, which he explicitly can’t pardon. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921/20 "2013-07-30T19:42:00Z")
While it is possible, certain criteria must be followed, as quoting from Clinton v. Jones; fn 39. Of course, it does not follow that a court may " ‘proceed against the president as against an ordinary individual,’ " United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S., at 715 (quoting United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 30, 192 (No. 14,692d) (CC Va. 1807)). Special caution is appropriate if the materials or testimony sought by the court relate to a President’s official activities, with respect to which “[t]he interest in preserving confidentiality is weighty indeed and entitled to great respect.” 418 U. S., at 712. We have made clear that in a criminal case the powerful interest in the “fair administration of criminal justice” requires that the evidence be given under appropriate circumstances lest the “very integrity of the judicial system” be eroded. Id., at 709, 711-712. see also fn 23; > **[William Jefferson CLINTON, Petitioner, v. Paula Corbin JONES.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/520/681)** [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-a-sitting-potus-be-arrested-rod-blagojevich-style-if-charged-with-a-crime/664921.md?page=2)