# Was the Arpaio pardon unconstitutional? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 14, 2018, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129 "2018-05-14T13:02:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/21 "2018-05-14T21:33:29Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Bullshit. > > I used to vote for Republicans regularly. Fuck, I voted for Bush in 2000. Show me some Republicans who can credibly promise to vote against Trump and I’ll vote for them. Except such people don’t exist in 2018. I’m curious, you apparently didn’t vote for Bush in '04, McCain in '08, or Romney in '12 (and presumably not Trump in '16). If Romney and McCain didn’t qualify as “some Republicans who can credibly promise to vote against Trump”, I’m having difficulty imagining how anyone could get over the hurdle you’ve set. So my question is this: Why didn’t you vote for McCain in '08 or Romney in '12? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/22 "2018-05-14T21:34:45Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > No, but I also don’t think that “Fuck you, ha ha” is an appropriate response to the fact that nobody can keep Trump and his cronies from pissing on the law. They’re not “pissing on the law”, at least not in the case of the Arpaio pardon. As noted earlier in this thread, it was a perfectly Constitutional exercise of President Trump’s power to pardon. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/23 "2018-05-14T21:36:00Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > No… So why did you call it “the obvious approach”? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/24 "2018-05-14T21:42:43Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > They’re not “pissing on the law”, at least not in the case of the Arpaio pardon. As noted earlier in this thread, it was a perfectly Constitutional exercise of President Trump’s power to pardon. And yet it was still pissing on the law. Joe CERTAINLY has been pissing on the law, and Trump endorses that. It is of course the case that use of the pardon power always carries the risk of being considered an attack on the law (because it explicitly is - it takes the entire judicial process and throws it out), but it’s hard to get more flagrant about it than backing Ole’ boy Joe. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > So why did you call it “the obvious approach”? If “Fuck you ha ha, we support crime, racism, and tyranny and are super-happy that the current president does as well” is the position one is presented with, the obvious approach is to respond with the similar mindset. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/25 "2018-05-14T21:46:04Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Of course the flaw in this plan is that murder is a state crime, and the president only has the power to pardon for offenses against the United States. So for the same reason that Trump can’t pardon financial shenanigans that are crimes against the State of New York, some hypothetical future president can’t pardon murders that take place in Arizona. You have a point, though I’m sure steps could be taken to mitigate this. Kidnap him and take him across state lines first, perhaps? The president could post an instructional video on how to murder somebody and get away with it scott-free, with the final step being “If I was annoyed by whoever you killed, I’ll totally pardon you. Here’s a (long) list.” ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/26 "2018-05-14T21:54:14Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > You have a point, though I’m sure steps could be taken to mitigate this. Kidnap him and take him across state lines first, perhaps? The president could post an instructional video on how to murder somebody and get away with it scott-free, with the final step being “If I was annoyed by whoever you killed, I’ll totally pardon you. Here’s a (long) list.” I think the state could still charge and convict, even if the federal charge was pardoned. That’s unless it’s a state like NY, which recognizes federal pardons. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/27 "2018-05-14T21:59:25Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m curious, you apparently didn’t vote for Bush in '04, McCain in '08, or Romney in '12 (and presumably not Trump in '16). If Romney and McCain didn’t qualify as “some Republicans who can credibly promise to vote against Trump”, I’m having difficulty imagining how anyone could get over the hurdle you’ve set. So my question is this: Why didn’t you vote for McCain in '08 or Romney in '12? Because the cancer consuming the Republican party didn’t pop up out of nowhere on November 8, 2016. Trump is just the culmination of it. Hey, you wanna run some reasonable Republicans in the future that I’ll consider voting for, knock yourself out. But the problem with this is that any decent up and coming people are going to have to align themselves with Trump to have a future in the Republican Party. If you can’t stomach that, your options are to sit on the sidelines, or sign up with the Democrats. Anyway, if you don’t like being smeared by Trump’s broad brush just because you vote Republican, sux to be you. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/28 "2018-05-14T22:36:02Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > … Hey, you wanna run some reasonable Republicans in the future that I’ll consider voting for, knock yourself out. … The “reasonable Republicans” lost in '08 and '12 and Trump won. _shrug_ ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/29 "2018-05-14T23:00:55Z")
Arpaio walked this time, but he’ll end up back in the slammer sooner or later. His kind always does. [_Law & Order_ Dunk-Dunk sound effect] ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/30 "2018-05-14T23:03:38Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Arpaio walked this time, but he’ll end up back in the slammer sooner or later. His kind always does. [_Law & Order_ Dunk-Dunk sound effect] His rate is what, something like one offense per 80 years? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/31 "2018-05-14T23:08:00Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > His rate is what, something like one offense per 80 years? Given that you don’t have to be convicted to have an “offense”, he’s racked up a few more than that. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/32 "2018-05-14T23:14:50Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The “reasonable Republicans” lost in '08 and '12 and Trump won. _shrug_ So your response is to go all-in supporting the unreasonable Republicans. See, it all depends on whether you actually want what you say you want. Your embrace of Trump proves…well, it proves what it proves. I could go on, but this thread isn’t in the pit and isn’t about Trump exactly. To get back to the OP, the pardon was perfectly constitutional. Unwise and ridiculous doesn’t mean unconstitutional. The President can do all sorts of things that are unwise and ridiculous that aren’t unconstitutional or illegal. But when we elect an conman as president, this is what happens. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/33 "2018-05-14T23:19:30Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Given that you don’t have to be convicted to have an “offense”, he’s racked up a few more than that. I don’t know what this means. You have to be convicted to “end up back in the slammer”, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/34 "2018-05-14T23:21:59Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I don’t know what this means. You have to be convicted to “end up back in the slammer”, don’t you? It means that you’re not going to convince _anyone_ that Joe is an innocent angel. I was flabbergasted that you even wrote something so astoundingly stupid. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/35 "2018-05-14T23:24:15Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > It means that you’re not going to convince _anyone_ that Joe is an innocent angel. I was flabbergasted that you even wrote something so astoundingly stupid. He’s a _pardoned_ angel, and he’s out of office, so the odds of him doing something to “end up back in the slammer” at this point seem vanishingly small. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/36 "2018-05-14T23:28:27Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > He’s a _pardoned_ angel, and he’s out of office, so the odds of him doing something to “end up back in the slammer” at this point seem vanishingly small. Oh, I’m not saying he’ll be back in the slammer. I was objecting to your outrageous claim that he’d only committed _one offense_ in his entire life. Hell, I’ve committed more offenses than that just counting speeding (though I’ve never actually been ticketed for that). Joe’s done a bit more than speed. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/37 "2018-05-14T23:40:33Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > His rate is what, something like one offense per 80 years? By that metric, Bull Connor is preferable to Sheriff Joe. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/38 "2018-05-14T23:44:46Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Oh, I’m not saying he’ll be back in the slammer. I was objecting to your outrageous claim that he’d only committed _one offense_ in his entire life. > > Hell, I’ve committed more offenses than that just counting speeding (though I’ve never actually been ticketed for that). Joe’s done a bit more than speed. My “outrageous claim” was in response to **Bryan Ekers** prediction that “he’ll end up back in the slammer sooner or later. His kind always does.” In that context, I thought it was obvious that “offense” referred to a criminal offense. Apparently not for some though? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/39 "2018-05-15T00:00:44Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > My “outrageous claim” was in response to **Bryan Ekers** prediction that “he’ll end up back in the slammer sooner or later. His kind always does.” In that context, I thought it was obvious that “offense” referred to a criminal offense. Apparently not for some though? I’m sure that given enough time the dude would do something illegal. His kind always does. Unlike **Bryan Ekers** , though, I’m not at all confident the dude won’t die before he does something egregious enough to attract attention. (Especially given how normalized racism and such are becoming nowadays.) ---
**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:** [May 15, 2018, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129/40 "2018-05-15T00:10:29Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The “reasonable Republicans” lost in '08 and '12 and Trump won. _shrug_ That’s the point. His winning doesn’t create any obligation for Republicans to vote with him. And, as long as they do, anyone who doesn’t support Trump should vote against the Republicans. That Trump won the primaries, which was mostly Republicans voting, tells us the problems in your party. That the reasonable Republicans lost is a condemnation of your party. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-arpaio-pardon-unconstitutional/814129.md?page=3)