Presidential Pardon
When and how are pardons supposed to be used? Why does the Constitution even grant the president the power to pardon? Can it be used to pardon any crime?
On the surface, it seems to make the president above the law. CNN just reported that president Trump promised to pardon the head of CBP if he broke the law. It would seem the president could just do this for any law or policy he doesn't like and thereby bypass Congress or the courts.
pardon
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
add a comment |
When and how are pardons supposed to be used? Why does the Constitution even grant the president the power to pardon? Can it be used to pardon any crime?
On the surface, it seems to make the president above the law. CNN just reported that president Trump promised to pardon the head of CBP if he broke the law. It would seem the president could just do this for any law or policy he doesn't like and thereby bypass Congress or the courts.
pardon
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
add a comment |
When and how are pardons supposed to be used? Why does the Constitution even grant the president the power to pardon? Can it be used to pardon any crime?
On the surface, it seems to make the president above the law. CNN just reported that president Trump promised to pardon the head of CBP if he broke the law. It would seem the president could just do this for any law or policy he doesn't like and thereby bypass Congress or the courts.
pardon
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
When and how are pardons supposed to be used? Why does the Constitution even grant the president the power to pardon? Can it be used to pardon any crime?
On the surface, it seems to make the president above the law. CNN just reported that president Trump promised to pardon the head of CBP if he broke the law. It would seem the president could just do this for any law or policy he doesn't like and thereby bypass Congress or the courts.
pardon
pardon
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
asked 2 hours ago
user27343user27343
756
756
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime, if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathters, Alexander Hamaliton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in the Federalist Paper No. 74. The idea behind them was that some situations negate the need to punish someone or to punish them severely.
The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed74.asp
Some people do view some pardons as inappropriate because they take away the ability of the courts to enforce their rulings. Who gets one is in the discretion of the President though.
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
add a comment |
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later governmental civil penalty, only from a criminal prosecution.
A President probably cannot pardon himself (or herself). We can't be sure, no US President has ever tried, so no court has ever ruled on this. Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon is as close as the US has gotten to such a case.
Pardons, like most governmental powers, can be abused. There are various checks to try to deter and limit abuse, but they are not perfect. If the President (or any high official) is abusive, powers will be abused.
The constitutional power of the president to grant pardons is copied from the power that the King of England had to grant pardons. Federalist #74, as Putvi points out, justifies the power and its scope at some length.
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
|
show 7 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39066%2fpresidential-pardon%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime, if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathters, Alexander Hamaliton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in the Federalist Paper No. 74. The idea behind them was that some situations negate the need to punish someone or to punish them severely.
The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed74.asp
Some people do view some pardons as inappropriate because they take away the ability of the courts to enforce their rulings. Who gets one is in the discretion of the President though.
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
add a comment |
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime, if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathters, Alexander Hamaliton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in the Federalist Paper No. 74. The idea behind them was that some situations negate the need to punish someone or to punish them severely.
The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed74.asp
Some people do view some pardons as inappropriate because they take away the ability of the courts to enforce their rulings. Who gets one is in the discretion of the President though.
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
add a comment |
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime, if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathters, Alexander Hamaliton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in the Federalist Paper No. 74. The idea behind them was that some situations negate the need to punish someone or to punish them severely.
The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed74.asp
Some people do view some pardons as inappropriate because they take away the ability of the courts to enforce their rulings. Who gets one is in the discretion of the President though.
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime, if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathters, Alexander Hamaliton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in the Federalist Paper No. 74. The idea behind them was that some situations negate the need to punish someone or to punish them severely.
The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed74.asp
Some people do view some pardons as inappropriate because they take away the ability of the courts to enforce their rulings. Who gets one is in the discretion of the President though.
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
answered 2 hours ago
PutviPutvi
85718
85718
add a comment |
add a comment |
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later governmental civil penalty, only from a criminal prosecution.
A President probably cannot pardon himself (or herself). We can't be sure, no US President has ever tried, so no court has ever ruled on this. Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon is as close as the US has gotten to such a case.
Pardons, like most governmental powers, can be abused. There are various checks to try to deter and limit abuse, but they are not perfect. If the President (or any high official) is abusive, powers will be abused.
The constitutional power of the president to grant pardons is copied from the power that the King of England had to grant pardons. Federalist #74, as Putvi points out, justifies the power and its scope at some length.
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
|
show 7 more comments
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later governmental civil penalty, only from a criminal prosecution.
A President probably cannot pardon himself (or herself). We can't be sure, no US President has ever tried, so no court has ever ruled on this. Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon is as close as the US has gotten to such a case.
Pardons, like most governmental powers, can be abused. There are various checks to try to deter and limit abuse, but they are not perfect. If the President (or any high official) is abusive, powers will be abused.
The constitutional power of the president to grant pardons is copied from the power that the King of England had to grant pardons. Federalist #74, as Putvi points out, justifies the power and its scope at some length.
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
|
show 7 more comments
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later governmental civil penalty, only from a criminal prosecution.
A President probably cannot pardon himself (or herself). We can't be sure, no US President has ever tried, so no court has ever ruled on this. Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon is as close as the US has gotten to such a case.
Pardons, like most governmental powers, can be abused. There are various checks to try to deter and limit abuse, but they are not perfect. If the President (or any high official) is abusive, powers will be abused.
The constitutional power of the president to grant pardons is copied from the power that the King of England had to grant pardons. Federalist #74, as Putvi points out, justifies the power and its scope at some length.
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later governmental civil penalty, only from a criminal prosecution.
A President probably cannot pardon himself (or herself). We can't be sure, no US President has ever tried, so no court has ever ruled on this. Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon is as close as the US has gotten to such a case.
Pardons, like most governmental powers, can be abused. There are various checks to try to deter and limit abuse, but they are not perfect. If the President (or any high official) is abusive, powers will be abused.
The constitutional power of the president to grant pardons is copied from the power that the King of England had to grant pardons. Federalist #74, as Putvi points out, justifies the power and its scope at some length.
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
16.9k3665
16.9k3665
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
|
show 7 more comments
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
Upon what do you base the claim that the president can be impeached for using pardons too freely? I understand you said it's not likely, I just don't think it meets the standard.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
@Putvi the president can be impeached and removed for whatever a majority of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate think proper. There is no enforceable standard beyond the good judgement of Congress. Read a history of the impeachment and trial of President Johnson (who came within 1 vote of conviction and removal) to see what reasons have passed muster in the past. But as to this case, i think in the section on impeachment, the Federalist says that it is the general remedy for the abuse of presidential power. And I think that has been the general understanding ever since. Who says otherwise?
– David Siegel
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
I have researched the trial of Johnson, but that was based on what is considered "high crimes and misdemeanors, not just anything congress feels is enough.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
1
1
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
@Putvi corrupt conduct would fall within the ambit of high crimes and misdemeanours
– Dale M
1 hour ago
1
1
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
@DaleM I guess you could try for anything being a high crime or misdemeanor, but I don't think many people would agree.
– Putvi
1 hour ago
|
show 7 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39066%2fpresidential-pardon%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
