Should the Presidential Pardon have some limits?

[milestogo]

It seems to me that this is one area that can easily be abused.

[OLDMDDEM]

1. Yes.

It should exclude family and anyone that sent support money to the president's website.

[The Magistrate]

2. It Should, Sir

There should be no eligibility for:

Persons who have worked on campaigns for the President or the party on whose platform the President ran.

Persons who have donated funds to the President or party on whose platform the President ran.

Persons who have any business connection with the President or the President's family.

Persons whose crime has in any way benefited the President or party on whose platform the President ran.

Persons who have not yet been convicted of a crime the pardon will erase.

[Effete Snob]

8. Susan McDougal? Don Siegelman?

I have zero problem with that one.

I think you would want to refine that list a bit more to take into account prosecutions which were politically-motivated in the first place.

[unblock]

10. phrased as such, i think this is way too broad.

i think what you're getting at is the the president shouldn't be able to pardon any such person of campaign-related or electoral crimes. i think it's a bit much to say that someone shouldn't be able to qualify for any pardon under any circumstance just because they did a little door-to-door for a candidate or sent in $25.

as for the last one, carter pardoned all draft dodgers, nearly all of them in advance of any prosecution, never mind conviction, and i think that was a wise use of the pardon power.

[Hortensis]

3. There are some. Applies only to federal crimes that have already

been committed. Can't pardon future crimes not yet committed, as Attorney Eastman certainly wishes they could have been.

In usual practice under the pardon attorney office's regulations there're more complications that a president can get around by issuing preemptive pardons -- before charges filed, sentence served, etc. -- if he chose.

[tblue37]

4. Yes!

[milestogo]

5. So many of these MAGATs saw it as a "Get out of Jail Free" card.

[Wounded Bear]

6. Yes, but the Constitution doesn't mention any, so it's difficult...

[unblock]

7. probably no. problem is, there's a tricky trade-off between pardon abuse and prosecutorial abuse.

the founders created the pardon as a check against abusive prosecutors.

so, for the most part, any restriction of the pardon power opens the door for prosecutorial abuse.

just about the only restriction i can see working is that i think a pardon should not apply if it was corruptly granted, such as in return for a bribe.

[Novara]

9. In addition

No pardons for others involved in the same goddamn crime you're accused of. Grrrrrrrrrrrr.