Presidential Pardons...
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-5572922...
Outgoing Presidents have done this forever, along with doing it while in office, but doesn't it seem rather odd that a modern first-world democracy with a highly developed judicial system allows a single bloke to override said system in this way? It seems like the stuff of a Banana Republic rather than a proper, advanced democratic society.
Outgoing Presidents have done this forever, along with doing it while in office, but doesn't it seem rather odd that a modern first-world democracy with a highly developed judicial system allows a single bloke to override said system in this way? It seems like the stuff of a Banana Republic rather than a proper, advanced democratic society.
I think it's just another case of Trump not giving a damn for convention or his constitutional role.
We have the same power vested in one person here - HMQ is the font of all justice and legal authority and she can (technically) pardon or convict anyone of almost anything she fancies. But, as with all the vast range of sweeping autocratic powers she holds in theory, she doesn't do that. 'She' pardoned Alan Turing only after approval and consideration up the governmental and legal channels.
The POTUS is in the same position - they can override the judicial system and issue pardons as part of the US's constitutional system of checks and balances to stop a corrupt judiciary being able to convict people on spurious grounds without any way of overturning the conviction, and as a way of undoing miscarriages of justice from a figure outside the system that had got it wrong in the first place. But it's been understood by presidents for a long time that you shouldn't just pardon people because they're your supporters, because you agree with what they were trying to do or just to antagonise your political opponents. Trump doesn't care for convention, tradition or principles so the pardons are flying.
We have the same power vested in one person here - HMQ is the font of all justice and legal authority and she can (technically) pardon or convict anyone of almost anything she fancies. But, as with all the vast range of sweeping autocratic powers she holds in theory, she doesn't do that. 'She' pardoned Alan Turing only after approval and consideration up the governmental and legal channels.
The POTUS is in the same position - they can override the judicial system and issue pardons as part of the US's constitutional system of checks and balances to stop a corrupt judiciary being able to convict people on spurious grounds without any way of overturning the conviction, and as a way of undoing miscarriages of justice from a figure outside the system that had got it wrong in the first place. But it's been understood by presidents for a long time that you shouldn't just pardon people because they're your supporters, because you agree with what they were trying to do or just to antagonise your political opponents. Trump doesn't care for convention, tradition or principles so the pardons are flying.
2xChevrons said:
I think it's just another case of Trump not giving a damn for convention or his constitutional role.
We have the same power vested in one person here - HMQ is the font of all justice and legal authority and she can (technically) pardon or convict anyone of almost anything she fancies. But, as with all the vast range of sweeping autocratic powers she holds in theory, she doesn't do that. 'She' pardoned Alan Turing only after approval and consideration up the governmental and legal channels.
The POTUS is in the same position - they can override the judicial system and issue pardons as part of the US's constitutional system of checks and balances to stop a corrupt judiciary being able to convict people on spurious grounds without any way of overturning the conviction, and as a way of undoing miscarriages of justice from a figure outside the system that had got it wrong in the first place. But it's been understood by presidents for a long time that you shouldn't just pardon people because they're your supporters, because you agree with what they were trying to do or just to antagonise your political opponents. Trump doesn't care for convention, tradition or principles so the pardons are flying.
That's not how it happens here though and the number of her "autocratic" powers which still exist are tiny. Even then it's never the Monarch who makes decisions on pardons personally, it's the Government exercising the Royal Prerogative. In reality it would have not been her issuing the pardon after advice and investigation by ministers, it's the other way round. Ministers would "advise" her who they were going to pardon and she would rubber-stamp it or at least fail to object. We have the same power vested in one person here - HMQ is the font of all justice and legal authority and she can (technically) pardon or convict anyone of almost anything she fancies. But, as with all the vast range of sweeping autocratic powers she holds in theory, she doesn't do that. 'She' pardoned Alan Turing only after approval and consideration up the governmental and legal channels.
The POTUS is in the same position - they can override the judicial system and issue pardons as part of the US's constitutional system of checks and balances to stop a corrupt judiciary being able to convict people on spurious grounds without any way of overturning the conviction, and as a way of undoing miscarriages of justice from a figure outside the system that had got it wrong in the first place. But it's been understood by presidents for a long time that you shouldn't just pardon people because they're your supporters, because you agree with what they were trying to do or just to antagonise your political opponents. Trump doesn't care for convention, tradition or principles so the pardons are flying.
The situation I don't think is similar to that of the US President. He seems to have unlimited power to pardon anyone which appears to run contrary to any system of checks and balances. An unfettered right to pardon your mates and political allies does not seem to be particularly balanced to me. It appears that he is acting in an entirely constitutional and legal role in doing this. I'm just surprised that a country which makes such a big thing of the whole truth and justice mantra allows it's leader to essentially act like an absolute Monarch in this respect.
I wondered about this too when I heard this morning that Trump had pardoned 73 people.
I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
Although most of these do appear to have some merit
I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
Although most of these do appear to have some merit
Edited by Camoradi on Wednesday 20th January 11:49
Edited by Camoradi on Wednesday 20th January 11:50
Camoradi said:
I wondered about this too when I heard this morning that Trump had pardoned 73 people.
I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
You can probably be sure of one thing though, none of them paid money for their pardon, unlike...I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
Camoradi said:
I wondered about this too when I heard this morning that Trump had pardoned 73 people.
I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
Although most of these do appear to have some merit
Although they still seem to be completely within the absolute power of the President, commutations are a bit more understandable than complete pardons. I can sort of accept some sort of benevolent act on behalf of a President to reduce a sentence that on the face of it appears too harsh, or because the person has shown himself to have reformed, or has provided some service to the country during his incarceration. It still seems a bit "off" for it to be done at the sole whim of a single person though.I assumed it was a power which was seldom used
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_grant...
"Obama holds the record for the largest single-day use of the clemency power, granting 330 commutations on January 19, 2017, his last full day in office.[6][7] He also issued more commutations than the past 13 presidents combined.[2][8]"
Although most of these do appear to have some merit
Edited by Camoradi on Wednesday 20th January 11:49
Edited by Camoradi on Wednesday 20th January 11:50
I just can't see how you can rationally justify placing the power to completely and irrevocably cancel a criminal conviction in the hands of one person, seemingly with no judicial oversight or even a code of practice to follow. It just seems very dictatorial.
Psycho Warren said:
Its not really one person though is it? He will surely have a team of advisors who will have done the leg work researching who might be reasonably deserving of commutation or a pardon. Its just rubber stamped by him.
Yes, Steve Bannon would be at the top of any Presidential pardoning system.FourWheelDrift said:
Psycho Warren said:
Its not really one person though is it? He will surely have a team of advisors who will have done the leg work researching who might be reasonably deserving of commutation or a pardon. Its just rubber stamped by him.
Yes, Steve Bannon would be at the top of any Presidential pardoning system.
Jasandjules said:
98elise said:
It does seem to be an utterly ridiculous power. Pardons have a place (Turing for example), but not where the conviction or sentence is justified or where people have committed crimes on your behalf.
So is it pardons for things you agree with then?That is very far from the simple concept of pardons for things you agree with.
It's an utterly ridiculous power. I guess there should be a way to right historical wrongs. Perhaps a way for government to send a case back to a special court even after all the traditional routes to appeal have been used, particularly for cases where the law has since changed. The presidential pardon makes a bit of a mockery of the justice system IMO. Interestingly Trump has used it less than most, albeit possibly more for his friends than to right historical injustices. I never knew Clinton pardoned his brother on his last day in office!
from the BBC of all places...
from the BBC of all places...
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 20th January 15:15
I would think its not about the quantity but the quality.
A lot of trumps are utter scumbags.
I would hope clever prosecutors held back a lot of charges in case the likes of bannon were pardoned.
At the end of the day its like the honour system in the UK. Looking for future favours or rewarding past efforts.
A lot of trumps are utter scumbags.
I would hope clever prosecutors held back a lot of charges in case the likes of bannon were pardoned.
At the end of the day its like the honour system in the UK. Looking for future favours or rewarding past efforts.
Fundoreen said:
I would think its not about the quantity but the quality.
A lot of trumps are utter scumbags.
I would hope clever prosecutors held back a lot of charges in case the likes of bannon were pardoned.
At the end of the day its like the honour system in the UK. Looking for future favours or rewarding past efforts.
I'm not sure that's how it works. It was explained somewhere that a Pardon can be given at any point after the commission of the crime, not merely a conviction. That being the case, if the Pres issues a decree saying that Joe Bloggs is hereby pardoned for any crime committed by him before the date of this order then surely that would apply to anything whether it's known or not? Maybe he specifies them in terms of specific crimes but the relevant section of the Constitution appears to be extremely wide. A lot of trumps are utter scumbags.
I would hope clever prosecutors held back a lot of charges in case the likes of bannon were pardoned.
At the end of the day its like the honour system in the UK. Looking for future favours or rewarding past efforts.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff