Yeah, I thought you had to be convicted of something!?! Well, they prosecuted Trump in 3 different States! We can do the same! Time to fire up some State AG’s with the quickness! Let’s Roll!
While these last minute preemptive pardons issued by the Biden team are angering on numerous levels, preemptive pardons are not without precedent...
*Ford pardoned Nixon in 1974 before any official charges were ever levied related to Watergate.
*Carter pardoned anyone who avoided the draft during Vietnam against any future prosecutions.
Legal standing for these types of pardons were affirmed by SCOTUS in Ex Parte Garland (1866) where the Court held that POTUS* could pardon individuals before conviction or even formal charges. (*is Biden legally POTUS?)
They can face legal challenges related to Scope & Specificity, Judicial Review of Motivation, and Separation of Powers concerns.
Scope
A pardon must clearly identify the offenses it covers. Ambiguities in scope can lead to litigation over whether a specific act is covered. A vague or broad pardon could be challenged as unconstitutional for exceeding POTUS authority.
Judicial Review of Motivation
Courts generally do not review the President's motivation behind issuing pardons. However, in extraordinary circumstances, a legal challenge could argue that the pardon was issued in bad faith or violated constitutional principles (e.g., equal protection).
Separation of Powers Concerns
Challenges might arise if the pardon is seen as interfering with ongoing investigations or prosecutions, potentially encroaching on judicial or legislative authority.
Accepting a pardon is generally seen as an acknowledgement of guilt or culpability (Burdick v. United States, 1915). It would also negate the ability to plead the 5th in the future.
Refusing the pardon would mean they would be subject to prosecution, but maintains their stance of innocence.
Bottom line, it's a bullshit maneuver by a desperate DS, but there is at least viable legal challenges on multiple fronts with Scope being the primary one being that they are vague.
Theoretically, you would think, if he were engaging in the crimes surrounding him and his family, which included selling political favors to foreign entities including but not limited to adversarial nation-states like China, that it would amount to Treason, that he would be ineligible to be POTUS, but that is not the case.
Treason is firmly defined in the Constitution as Levying War against the US or Adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort, but for the act to be treasonous, there must be a declared State of War or hostility, and the accused must act with intent to aid an enemy of the US.
The Biden Family has always wanted to aid itself and the actions revealed by the Laptop, etc., doesn't present a case of Treason, but there are other significant crimes: Bribery, Espionage, FCPA, FARA, Conspiracy, Money Laundering, Obstruction, and Violation of Oath of Office (not technically a crime).
HOWEVER, there is nothing in the Constitution that disqualifies anyone from running for POTUS with felony convictions, including treason.
Yeah, I thought you had to be convicted of something!?! Well, they prosecuted Trump in 3 different States! We can do the same! Time to fire up some State AG’s with the quickness! Let’s Roll!
Millie can be court- martialed
President Biden gave a list of all those who have committed crimes.
IS it even his signature...
Sounds to me like Biden is attempting a Hail Mary play. I don't think this ball is going to make it past the goal line, though.
While these last minute preemptive pardons issued by the Biden team are angering on numerous levels, preemptive pardons are not without precedent...
*Ford pardoned Nixon in 1974 before any official charges were ever levied related to Watergate.
*Carter pardoned anyone who avoided the draft during Vietnam against any future prosecutions.
Legal standing for these types of pardons were affirmed by SCOTUS in Ex Parte Garland (1866) where the Court held that POTUS* could pardon individuals before conviction or even formal charges. (*is Biden legally POTUS?)
They can face legal challenges related to Scope & Specificity, Judicial Review of Motivation, and Separation of Powers concerns.
Scope A pardon must clearly identify the offenses it covers. Ambiguities in scope can lead to litigation over whether a specific act is covered. A vague or broad pardon could be challenged as unconstitutional for exceeding POTUS authority.
Judicial Review of Motivation Courts generally do not review the President's motivation behind issuing pardons. However, in extraordinary circumstances, a legal challenge could argue that the pardon was issued in bad faith or violated constitutional principles (e.g., equal protection).
Separation of Powers Concerns Challenges might arise if the pardon is seen as interfering with ongoing investigations or prosecutions, potentially encroaching on judicial or legislative authority.
Accepting a pardon is generally seen as an acknowledgement of guilt or culpability (Burdick v. United States, 1915). It would also negate the ability to plead the 5th in the future.
Refusing the pardon would mean they would be subject to prosecution, but maintains their stance of innocence.
Bottom line, it's a bullshit maneuver by a desperate DS, but there is at least viable legal challenges on multiple fronts with Scope being the primary one being that they are vague.
Excellent. Thank you for the explanation.
Would Joe Biden being part of the crimes also weigh against the pardons holding up?
Theoretically, you would think, if he were engaging in the crimes surrounding him and his family, which included selling political favors to foreign entities including but not limited to adversarial nation-states like China, that it would amount to Treason, that he would be ineligible to be POTUS, but that is not the case.
Treason is firmly defined in the Constitution as Levying War against the US or Adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort, but for the act to be treasonous, there must be a declared State of War or hostility, and the accused must act with intent to aid an enemy of the US.
The Biden Family has always wanted to aid itself and the actions revealed by the Laptop, etc., doesn't present a case of Treason, but there are other significant crimes: Bribery, Espionage, FCPA, FARA, Conspiracy, Money Laundering, Obstruction, and Violation of Oath of Office (not technically a crime).
HOWEVER, there is nothing in the Constitution that disqualifies anyone from running for POTUS with felony convictions, including treason.
Also how can Hunter be pardoned for crimes he hasn't been charged with? Only accused of? Can they still hold a trial even though he is pardoned?