Man, this idea of a “secret pardon” is so good that I wish I had speculated it! This is exactly the kind of thing Trump would do. You’re right that he doesn’t need to “file” his pardon with anyone — he just needs to be able to document that he issued it while he was President. So he just keeps this in his pocket until/if he’s charged with any federal crimes, and then he goes on television and dramatically pulls it out for the cameras and says he knew that the corrupt Biden Administration would pursue a political prosecution of himself and his children, so he beat them at their own game!
It’s everything Trump loves – good television, exploiting loopholes, and WINNING! It’d turn any trial into even more of a circus and delay any final justice for years as the validity of the pardon is litigated. At this point I’d be surprised if he doesn’t do this.
That article doesn’t make it sound certain. It makes it clear that Trump has been saying all along that he plans on pardoning himself, his family members, and a bunch of his collaborators. And he’s been talking about it more frequently in the final days of his presidency.
At every step, he’s had people trying to convince him not to do it. But then he moves back to the idea. And people have to pull him away from it again.
So right now, the day before he leaves office, he may have agreed to not issue those pardons. But we’ll have to see if he doesn’t change his mind before noon tomorrow.
Although there’s no way to know for certain at this point, I’d bet my mortgage that pardons for his family and himself have been drawn up. The only question is whether or not he will issue them.
I read something earlier today that made sense and changed my mind about Trump wanting to do this. Apparently somebody came up with an argument that convinced Trump a self pardon is a bad idea. “The way it stands now, they may or may not prosecute you. But if you self pardon, they have to prosecute you to test whether or not it stands up.”
Interesting question if a President can issue pardons in pectore. The issue would be what would happen if you need it 20 years down the road and that President is not available to verify it.
Assuming the notary him/herself is still around, available to testify, not thoroughly discredited by subsequent allegations of fraud, AND still on Team Trump, yes. However, what happens if the notary isn’t available or, having been screwed by the Donald, decides to say “nope, not my signature”?
Nothing would happen. The concept of in pectore is a Catholic construct and has no application in law.
I don’t think there’s a court in this country that would rule that a federal policy can take effect without first being documented, witnessed, and notarized.
The whole point of notarization is to provide a legally accepted means of certifying the authenticity of a document (i.e., without having to get experts or eyewitnesses to testify in person). You probably have important documents (real estate sales contracts, etc.) that got notarized; they don’t suddenly become suspect just because the notary who certified them died or went AWOL.
No, they don’t, but then the documents I have notarized (such as those sales contracts) typically result in public action such as a deed filed with the registrar and available for public inspection fairly quickly. I’m not sitting on documents for decades KNOWING that the authenticity and timing of when it was signed is going to be incredibly important and quite controversial. While contesting the validity of notarization is fairly rare, it does happen, and even notarized documents may be thrown out based on uncertainty or errors.
In many jurisdictions, a will can be deposited with a government office (clerk of the court, for example, or registrar of deed), in part to prevent challenges to its authenticity.
(Also, of course, the contents of your will should not be a shock to the people affected. They may not LIKE it, but they shouldn’t be surprised at your decisions.)
