# Is there actually anything positive about presidential pardons? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [December 23, 2020, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747 "2020-12-23T15:43:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/22 "2020-12-23T21:50:20Z")
I thought that was probably it. Still, if there is any time period the president can’t issue a pardon there should be alternatives. And effectively, a president can’t issue a pardon for most of the time he’s in office because of political concerns. You would also have to have that power restricted before the election, the president doesn’t have to inform the public at the time he issues pardons does he? I think someone introduced a bill to keep Trump from doing that during the Russia investigation but I doubt it went anywhere. So in theory, a president can start issuing pardons the day he is inaugurated and then keep them secret until they are no longer political problems for him, i.e., after he’s been voted out of office. ---
**Author:** ![velomont](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/8491ac/32.png) [@velomont](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/velomont)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/23 "2020-12-23T21:59:44Z")
> [@DavidNRockies](#): > > Maybe it **is** time for another Constitutional Convention. Helluva’ Pay-per-View event, anyway, eh ? Period-costume would have to be mandatory😁 ---
**Author:** ![digs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/digs/32/14889_2.png) [@digs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/digs)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/24 "2020-12-23T22:31:36Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > Hell, if he wants, he can pardon every single convict in the federal prison system. So there’s nothing anyone can do about that? The Trump years have opened my eyes to how much power we’ve granted one person. So many times there’d be something like a tariff or a law and Trump just imposed" it, and I was aghast: “Doesn’t that need to be approved by Congress or SOMEone?” Nope, sorry, Trump can just mess up the country or even whole world if he’s in a mood one day… (or, right now, in a mood during the next month). ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/25 "2020-12-24T00:27:42Z")
Jimmy Carter pardoned hundreds of thousands: > **[President Carter pardons draft dodgers , Jan. 21, 1977](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/21/president-carter-pardons-draft-dodgers-jan-21-1977-346493)** > > The amnesty was meant to put an end to the bad feelings related to the Vietnam War. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/26 "2020-12-24T02:08:01Z")
Generally, the pardon power is inherently limited because it can only undo what the other branch did: if the courts throw people in jail unjustly, that can be undone. It’s a much less dangerous power than the ability to put them in jail in the first place. It’s a pretty effective check on political corruption. Trump’s novel development is to use the pardon to allow people to engage in criminal behavior on his behalf. This is personal corruption. I tend to agree that trying to build a system that is Trump proof may not be possible, or the light isn’t worth the candle. It’s like protecting your suburban house from marauding barbarians. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/27 "2020-12-24T08:37:33Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > I was disgusted by the Marc Rich deal, but did any Clinton pardon approach the foulness of freeing war criminals? I can’t elevate financial crimes to that level of despicability. Yeah, I think a few here are hinting at this being a “both sides” thing, but in terms of dubious pardons, Trump has done more in a day than basically all other modern presidents combined. And it wasn’t the first such day, nor will it be the last. I’m personally in favor of the pardon power, but it shouldn’t be solely on a president’s whim; it should go through a review process (as most did, prior to Trump), with maybe a couple criteria that need to be fulfilled. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/28 "2020-12-24T10:02:34Z")
Assuming it would be possible, I would argue that two restrictions would greatly reduce the problems with pardons. It need a conflict of interest restriction and a quid pro quo restriction. You can’t pardon someone if their crime involves you, or if they are a relative or something like that. And you can’t give out pardons in exchange for favors. That said, I think the real problem with pardons is that they are vested in a singular entity. That makes corruption and conflict of interest easy. And while Trump’s is obvious, it’s not always so. So you can’t say the voters will decide. The legislative branch already handles the other checks on judicial power. It can override a decision on a law by passing a new law. It can ammend the constitution with either state legislators or federal ones. And, although I would consider it a nuclear option, Congress has the power to designate what Courts are allowed to review. I get maybe wanting to give the executive some power. But I think it is much better vested in a group of people, where you’d need to have all of them corrupt. Oh, and I was under the impression that you can also appeal not based on procedure, but also on new or unpresented facts. Granted, it would still only work one direction–you can’t impose double jeopardy because you found more evidence the accused was guilty. But the same applies to pardons. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/29 "2020-12-24T10:17:48Z")
A positive is that it’s an important power with a real effect on people’s lives that is vested in the most democratic and most visible (and thus most accountable and most legitimate) entity of the federal government; the electoral college is _very imperfect_ at translating votes into power, and we’re living the consequences of that right now, but it’s not inherently better than the House (see 2012) and much better than the Senate. Making the US Constitution even more antidemocratic because its antidemocratic flaws caused an antidemocrat to hold the most democratic office is not a solution to anything; there’s an American disease where we’re so afraid of having a temporary bad government that we’d rather have a permanent lack of a government and I really fear that it’s going to lead us to a bad place eventually (presidential systems don’t have a great record of stability in dealing with long-term gridlock). As part of some grand reform where the system writ large is made more democratic and the pardon power is made less democratic, sure, maybe that would be a good idea, but as a pinprick change to the pardon power the only thing I’d see as a good idea would be a restriction on lame-duck pardons. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/30 "2020-12-24T12:01:38Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > I think that every President has had some set of pardons that meet a high ethical/moral standard. And every recent President has paid off some political debts with pardons. I think it’s just part and parcel of the pardon power. The best way to fix the system is to pass a law that the President may not pardon anyone during the last 6 (or 12) months of his term, and especially not in the last week, which is when every president abuses the power…(Clinton did it during the final hours of his term). This would force the President to take responsibility and face public opinion about his actions. Of course , this will never happen. (side issue, about constitutional law: The constitution gives the president the right to pardon, with no other details specified. Could Congress pass a law such as I suggested, i.e.keeping the power intact, but specifying details ( the dates when the President’s pardon-power are to be used)? Are there Supreme Court rulings or precedents like this.? ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/31 "2020-12-24T14:38:05Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > The best way to fix the system is to pass a law that the President may not pardon anyone during the last 6 (or 12) months of his term, and especially not in the last week, which is when every president abuses the power…(Clinton did it during the final hours of his term). > > This would force the President to take responsibility and face public opinion about his actions. > > Of course , this will never happen. > > (side issue, about constitutional law: The constitution gives the president the right to pardon, with no other details specified. Could Congress pass a law such as I suggested, i.e.keeping the power intact, but specifying details ( the dates when the President’s pardon-power are to be used)? Are there Supreme Court rulings or precedents like this.? IANAL, but I don’t see how that could possibly pass Constitutional muster. Congress can’t unilaterally limit powers granted to another branch by the Constitution. If they could, no branch has any powers except the ones Congress grants to them, Congress’ power becomes wholly unchecked, and the whole document becomes a nullity. > [@BigT](#): > > Assuming it would be possible, I would argue that two restrictions would greatly reduce the problems with pardons. It need a conflict of interest restriction and a quid pro quo restriction. You can’t pardon someone if their crime involves you, or if they are a relative or something like that. And you can’t give out pardons in exchange for favors. > > That said, I think the real problem with pardons is that they are vested in a singular entity. That makes corruption and conflict of interest easy. And while Trump’s is obvious, it’s not always so. So you can’t say the voters will decide. > > The legislative branch already handles the other checks on judicial power. It can override a decision on a law by passing a new law. It can ammend the constitution with either state legislators or federal ones. And, although I would consider it a nuclear option, Congress has the power to designate what Courts are allowed to review. _If_ you had a pardon _panel_, where a member with a conflict of interest could recuse themselves, or be recused by a vote of the other panel members, a conflict of interest bar would definitely be a good idea. But as long as the President has sole pardon authority, a conflict of interest bar is unworkable. You create a new class of criminal defendants that are excluded from the same due process as everyone else. Involving Congress seems to me like a terrible idea. There’s a reason “bills of attainder” are barred by the Constitution. Having the reverse situation, where a member of Congress slips a pardon for a buddy into a “must-pass” emergency appropriation bill would seem to me to be even _more_ ripe for abuse. > [@BigT](#): > > Oh, and I was under the impression that you can also appeal not based on procedure, but also on new or unpresented facts. Granted, it would still only work one direction–you can’t impose double jeopardy because you found more evidence the accused was guilty. But the same applies to pardons. That’s the opposite of my understanding, at least at the federal level. You can’t appeal solely on the grounds of actual innocence, only on grounds of procedural error or violation of Constitutional rights. Many individual states have statutes allowing appeals on grounds of actual innocence, and I think every state now has a statute allowing an appeal based on DNA evidence that wasn’t available at trial. At the _federal_ level, where the President’s pardon power applies, the _only_ recourse an actually innocent person whose conviction had no procedural errors or Constitutional violations has is a Presidential pardon. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/32 "2020-12-24T14:59:18Z")
The idea of giving the government the ability to pardon or grant clemency is a good thing in some cases. The problem with presidential pardons in the United States reveals the deeper problem we have, which is presidential democracy itself. We have a system of government that concentrates power disproportionately into one person or group of people who have the power to damage public faith in government. It would be better to have a parliamentary style government that can set up a board or commission on pardons and then use that commission to determine who is worthy of clemency. The constitutional framework of pardons that exists in the United States is ripe for corruption, as we’ve seen. Trump’s not the only one who has abused pardons, either. Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich was pretty sleazy as well. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/33 "2020-12-24T15:12:20Z")
First step is pretty simple I think. Legislation that requires any potential presidential pardon to be publicly announced prior to signing by the president. This time period I think should be at least 90 days, and probably more because of the time between election and inauguration day. This will at least bring the issue to the court of public opinion and would be considered prior to elections. Second step is a little more complex. The legislature should be able to prevent a pardon with something like a 2/3 vote of one or both houses. That may seem like a high bar to overcome but pardons should be bandied about like conventional legislation. This exception should be there for the worst of the worst cases as we are seeing now. I am wary of any more limitations on presidential pardons. Pardons are necessary to prevent miscarriages of justices. Sometimes the pardon itself can be a miscarriage of justice but I am positive allowing ordinary politics to affect the process much more will only make the situation worse. Because of Trump and the Republican party no longer even pay lip service to the concepts of justice and democracy then there people who must fear political persecution and pardons are at this time their only practical relief. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/34 "2020-12-24T15:29:04Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > First step is pretty simple I think. Legislation that requires any potential presidential pardon to be publicly announced prior to signing by the president. This time period I think should be at least 90 days, and probably more because of the time between election and inauguration day. This will at least bring the issue to the court of public opinion and would be considered prior to elections. > > Second step is a little more complex. The legislature should be able to prevent a pardon with something like a 2/3 vote of one or both houses. That may seem like a high bar to overcome but pardons should be bandied about like conventional legislation. This exception should be there for the worst of the worst cases as we are seeing now. The first step _wouldn’t_ be legislation. The first step would be a Constitutional amendment. The Constitution grants the President the power to grant reprieves and pardons. Period. Any Congressional limitation on that power would be unconstitutional. As long as you’re amending the Constitution, I’d personally be in favor of an independent pardon board, rather than vesting that power in a single official. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/35 "2020-12-24T15:39:17Z")
First of all, a Constitutional Amendment may be congressional legislation. I will have to find the source but I believe Congress still has the power to regulate the pardon process even if turns out they have no means to over-ride a presidential pardon. Among other things, I had already mentioned a measure introduced in the House to prevent presidents from issuing secret pardons. ETA: And the Constitution doesn’t put that ‘period’ after the pardon powers of the president. It merely says he has them, with no other qualifications. It does not say there can be no other way to pardon people, or any further restrictions. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/36 "2020-12-24T15:45:06Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > First step is pretty simple I think. Legislation that requires any potential presidential pardon to be publicly announced prior to signing by the president. I could be wrong, but I think any legislation would not have the force of law as pardons are a constitutionally-sanctioned presidential power. You’d need to ratify a new amendment, which ain’t easy even under the best of circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/37 "2020-12-24T15:55:14Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > First of all, a Constitutional Amendment may be congressional legislation. > > I will have to find the source but I believe Congress still has the power to regulate the pardon process even if turns out they have no means to over-ride a presidential pardon. Among other things, I had already mentioned a measure introduced in the House to prevent presidents from issuing secret pardons. > > ETA: And the Constitution doesn’t put that ‘period’ after the pardon powers of the president. It merely says he has them, with no other qualifications. It does not say there can be no other way to pardon people, or any further restrictions. Congress can’t amend the Constitution through legislation. Congress can _propose_ amendments, but they then must be ratified by the states. IANAL, but while I believe that someone has proposed legislation to regulate the Presidential pardon power, I can’t believe it would survive a court challenge if enacted. The Constitution grants the President power to grant pardons and reprieves. Period. Yes, I’m the one adding the “Period” for emphasis, but the Constitution does not put any limits on the pardon authority of the President, nor does it provide for any role for Congress in the process, or grant Congress any power to regulate it. As I wrote upthread, if Congress can unilaterally impose limits on the Constitutional powers granted to other branches, then de facto the other branches only have the powers that Congress grants them, Congress’ powers are unchecked, and the whole document becomes a nullity. As to whether Congress could also pardon individuals, I think that’s actually debatable. Again, IANAL, but I personally don’t think they have that power. They can absolutely decriminalize activities, and de facto pardon everyone convicted of that crime, but I don’t think they have the power to overturn specific convictions. But, again, IANAL, and I don’t think that’s as clear cut as the argument about their ability to regulate the President’s pardon authority. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/38 "2020-12-24T15:55:24Z")
Both you and @gdave could take a look at this article about [Congressional Control of Presidential Pardons.](https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=nljforum) ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/39 "2020-12-24T16:13:47Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > and especially not in the last week, which is when every president abuses the power…(Clinton did it during the final hours of his term). \< entertainment break \> And President Barlet did it in his final _minutes_. Pardoning Toby Ziegler was the last thing he did in the White House before leaving to attend Santos’ inauguration. \< /entertainment break \> ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/40 "2020-12-24T16:14:20Z")
Technically there is a limitation > [@Article 2 section 2](#): > > he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. Does that mean if someone besides the President is impeached, he can’t pardon them? > [@wikipedia](#): > > There is currently no universally accepted interpretation of the impeachment exception. Some argue that the president simply cannot use a pardon to stop an officeholder from being impeached, while others suggest that crimes underlying an impeachment cannot be pardoned by the president Brian ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2020, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747/41 "2020-12-24T16:16:27Z")
I didn’t read the entire article, but it seems that, at most, the essay presents a legal hypothesis, and it seems like a bit of a reach. It’s a reach to suppose that Congress could use its investigative powers to regulate a very clearly defined power to pardon under the Executive. At minimum, we’d likely need the Court to agree with this hypothesis, and I don’t see it happening anytime in the next 30 years. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-actually-anything-positive-about-presidential-pardons/928747.md?page=3)