2 ms·
Why a Self-Pardon Is Not Constitutional
- salawat 6y agoLook, not to be a stick on the mud I appreciate, and deep down even personally endorse and support the sentiment behind this person's deep-dive. However. I refuse to allow my Constitution to be further butchered by creative re-interpretation. The Founders were not going hyper-elanorate when laying this thing out. The Pardon power is explicitly the power to grant a pardon from Executive origin'd enforcement actions. I.e., whetther you did something or not, I officially grant thatthe United States' point of view on the matter is that the affair is closed. An Executive no-op, if you will. Impeachment is not an Executive function though. Thos is the one broad, constitutionally provisioned enforcement power afforded by the Constitution to the legislature, and the legislature blew it. Once the executive is out, he has nothing to fear from the legislative. However, when a new executive goes in, it may stand that a Pardon iss neither final, nor permanant. Nothing in the Constitution says that a Pardon cannot be reversed, as I"m fairly sure the Judiciary, reasoning from text would hold double-jeopardy isn't actually a factor, because no jury trial has occurred. Generally speaking though, no one has wanted to, nor do I necessarily think should, push the boundary on pardons without long thought and careful deliberation. That would constitute a very real elevation of politics to a higher standing than Justice, a move hitherto the collective Statesmen of the civilized world have tred with care around, but seems to becoming to a bit of a head recently. Or maybe I just haven't paid enough attention. I don't know. Last few years have completely screwed view of the world and how it works.