To the Editor:
The suggestions for pardon reform in “How to Repair the Pardon Process” (editorial, Dec. 24) don’t mention the most important change to the pardon power absent a constitutional amendment: The Supreme Court should rule that the president lacks the power to pardon a person not convicted.
That change alone would go far to reduce pardon abuses. Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter’s pardon of the Vietnam draft evaders, Bill Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, and any pardons President Trump might issue to members of his administration or his family for any as yet uncharged crimes — all should be void.
A pardon is a remedy granted only after a person has been convicted. That limitation on pardons is logical — people cannot be forgiven for crimes they have not been convicted of.
Michael J. Broyde
Atlanta
The writer is a professor at Emory University School of Law.
To the Editor:
When listing the limits to the “vast” presidential pardon power, you write, “Some constitutional scholars say” that presidents “may not pardon themselves.”
This view is held not only by some constitutional scholars. Nearly 50 years ago, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel had occasion to examine the extent of the pardon power. In its memorandum opinion it concluded, “Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself.”
The opinion is dated Aug. 5, 1974. Four days later, the president of the United States resigned his office.
Will President Trump try to do what even Richard Nixon did not dare to attempt?
William A. Shapiro
Albany, N.Y.
The writer is a lawyer.
To the Editor:
I agree that the time is right to press for changes. What I found disappointing was referencing Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon as an example of a president “exploiting mercy for dubious reasons.”
It was an unpopular decision at the time, one that Ford made at the beginning of his (unexpected) presidency. He knew he would be facing the voters in 1976, yet he made this very courageous move, explaining later, in his autobiography, that he wasn’t motivated by sympathy for Nixon, but that it was the “country’s health at home and around the world” that worried him.
Senator Edward Kennedy recognized this in his remarks when Ford was presented with the Profile in Courage Award in 2001. “I was one who spoke out against his action then. But time has a way of clarifying past events, and now we see that President Ford was right. His courage and dedication to our country made it possible for us to begin the process of healing.”
Clemency Power ›
Presidential Pardons, Explained
President Trump has discussed potential pardons that could test the boundaries of his constitutional power to nullify criminal liability. Here’s some clarity on his ability to pardon.
Home » Analysis & Comment » Opinion | The Misuse of the Presidential Pardon
Opinion | The Misuse of the Presidential Pardon
To the Editor:
The suggestions for pardon reform in “How to Repair the Pardon Process” (editorial, Dec. 24) don’t mention the most important change to the pardon power absent a constitutional amendment: The Supreme Court should rule that the president lacks the power to pardon a person not convicted.
That change alone would go far to reduce pardon abuses. Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter’s pardon of the Vietnam draft evaders, Bill Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, and any pardons President Trump might issue to members of his administration or his family for any as yet uncharged crimes — all should be void.
A pardon is a remedy granted only after a person has been convicted. That limitation on pardons is logical — people cannot be forgiven for crimes they have not been convicted of.
Michael J. Broyde
Atlanta
The writer is a professor at Emory University School of Law.
To the Editor:
When listing the limits to the “vast” presidential pardon power, you write, “Some constitutional scholars say” that presidents “may not pardon themselves.”
This view is held not only by some constitutional scholars. Nearly 50 years ago, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel had occasion to examine the extent of the pardon power. In its memorandum opinion it concluded, “Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself.”
The opinion is dated Aug. 5, 1974. Four days later, the president of the United States resigned his office.
Will President Trump try to do what even Richard Nixon did not dare to attempt?
William A. Shapiro
Albany, N.Y.
The writer is a lawyer.
To the Editor:
I agree that the time is right to press for changes. What I found disappointing was referencing Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon as an example of a president “exploiting mercy for dubious reasons.”
It was an unpopular decision at the time, one that Ford made at the beginning of his (unexpected) presidency. He knew he would be facing the voters in 1976, yet he made this very courageous move, explaining later, in his autobiography, that he wasn’t motivated by sympathy for Nixon, but that it was the “country’s health at home and around the world” that worried him.
Senator Edward Kennedy recognized this in his remarks when Ford was presented with the Profile in Courage Award in 2001. “I was one who spoke out against his action then. But time has a way of clarifying past events, and now we see that President Ford was right. His courage and dedication to our country made it possible for us to begin the process of healing.”
Clemency Power ›
Presidential Pardons, Explained
President Trump has discussed potential pardons that could test the boundaries of his constitutional power to nullify criminal liability. Here’s some clarity on his ability to pardon.
Source: Read Full Article