Pardon Me<\/p>\n
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. \u2013 Constitutional Oath for the Presiden<\/em>t<\/p>\n There are few powers as unlimited in the US Constitution as the Presidential power to pardon.\u00a0 In the complex system of checks and balances established by the Constitutional Convention where each branch has an alternate authority over the other; there is no check against the power of pardon.<\/p>\n John Marshall, who as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court established the power of the judiciary in the United States, defined the pardon power in 1833:<\/p>\n A pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed. It is the private, though official act of the executive magistrate….\u00a0 \u2013 John Marshall \u2013 US v Wilson<\/em><\/p>\n The Constitutional Convention recognized that no matter how structured and balanced the government was, there might be times when the \u201cgrace\u201d of a pardon was necessary.\u00a0 George Washington exercised this power during his Presidency, forgiving the participants in the Whiskey Rebellion.\u00a0 Most of the Confederate Civil War veterans were pardoned after the Civil War.\u00a0 Jimmy Carter pardoned many of those who dodged the draft during Vietnam. \u00a0And, while many disagreed with President Gerald Ford, his pardon of disgraced President Richard Nixon brought to an end three years of national turmoil.<\/p>\n These pardons had a high purpose, to reunite the nation after some critical event.\u00a0President Ford described it well; he was trying to end, \u201c\u2026our long national nightmare.\u201d<\/p>\n A second use of the pardon power was to \u201cright a wrong, \u201dthe \u201cprivate\u201d act that John Marshall described.\u00a0 \u00a0Some have been famous:\u00a0 Eugene Debs the Socialist Presidential candidate of the 1920\u2019s, Patty Hearst the kidnaped heiress turned terrorist.\u00a0 Some have tried to rectify the wrongs of an earlier time:\u00a0President Obama pardoned hundreds who were convicted of drug charges in the 1990\u2019s and given lengthy sentences during the \u201cwar on drugs.\u201d\u00a0 And some have been related to the President; President Clinton pardoned his brother Roger who had already completed a jail sentence for cocaine possession and trafficking.\u00a0 Roger was caught up in a sting that the President himself had authorized as Governor of Arkansas.<\/p>\n There is no check on the pardon power.\u00a0 If a President is willing to face impeachment and removal from office by the Congress, then he might be able exercise the pardon power in any way he chooses.\u00a0 At least, that\u2019s the position the President Donald Trump has taken, as he claims to have the power to \u201cpardon himself.\u201d<\/p>\n However, there are two legal precepts that could alter Mr. Trump\u2019s perception.\u00a0The first is the legal precept that no one can judge their own case.\u00a0 A pardon requires someone who can give the pardon and someone to accept it;\u00a0a President pardoning himself is in fact judge and jury.\u00a0 It is possible a court might be persuaded to void such a pardon.<\/p>\n The second is the legal concept of \u201ccorrupt purpose.\u201d\u00a0 If the President uses the pardon power to prevent testimony against himself, or if a President uses it to avoid personal prosecution, these actions have a corrupt purpose.\u00a0 Federal jury instructions describe corrupt purpose as:<\/p>\n A person acts \u201ccorruptly\u201d if he acts voluntarily and intentionally, with an improper motive of accomplishing either an unlawful result, or a lawful result by some unlawful method or means.<\/em><\/p>\n Avoiding or interfering with criminal prosecution is an unlawful result, so even the President\u2019s lawful act of pardoning may be considered corrupt.<\/p>\n Would a court, and ultimately the Supreme Court, rule that a Presidential pardon \u201cdoesn\u2019t count?\u201d\u00a0 If the President were to pardon, say, Paul Manafort, it is unlikely that the Court would stop it.\u00a0 The President might be held accountable for a corrupt use of his power, either by impeachment and removal, or by criminal indictment after the term in office is complete, but the pardon itself would probably stand.\u00a0 However, if the President were to try to pardon himself, this would create a crisis not foreseen in the halls of Philadelphia in 1787.<\/p>\n There certainly would be one price that any President that pardoned himself would face:\u00a0sure impeachment and removal by the Congress.\u00a0 President Trump should realize this from the response the Republicans in the House and Senate gave.\u00a0 Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) maybe put it best: \u00a0 \u201cIf I were President of the United States, and I had a lawyer that told me I could pardon myself, I think I would hire a new lawyer.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"