Research "Ex parte Garland"
A case dating all the way back to President Johnson.
He issued a blanket pardon Augustus Garland for all offenses related to his participation in the rebellion, and the supreme court ruled that pardons can be issued at any point by a president after the commission of a crime, regardless of whether or not they have been formally charged with the crime or not.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—I BEG YOUR PARDON: EX PARTE GARLAND OVERRULED; THE PRESIDENTIAL PARDON IS NO LONGER UNLIMITED
https://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/lawreview/vol41/iss1/7/
https://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1815&context=lawreview
Good find!
...I'm browsing it now, there are several salient points...
I can not read the whole thing right now but this seems to be an opinion or in depth review. Not an actual court ruling. I'm curious if this ever did get challenged in SCOTUS.
Here is the last paragraph of the paper.
"It is time for the Supreme Court, to review the 150-year jurisprudence involving the presidential pardon and finally declare: (1) Garland is overruled; (2) the presidential pardon is limited; and (3) a new interpretation of the pardon’s scope is necessary. By sticking to its 1867 ruling, the Court is upholding bad law, while limiting its ability to protect itself, preserve its power, and remain an effective, coequal branch in the United States government."
...sometimes you just have to take the time...
Ok looked closer. Good info. Seems still a bit of a murky are to me, but will be interesting to see where this all ends up. I think this is of great note too:
"He was set to reappear before the grand jury but instead received “a full and unconditional pardon for all offenses against the United States.”
President Woodrow Wilson issued this pardon in an effort to “eliminate the possibility of [Burdick’s] prosecution and thus frustrate [his] . . . claim of Fifth Amendment privilege.” Burdick rejected Wilson’s pardon, refused to answer questions about his sources, pled his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and was fined and imprisoned for contempt of court."
Nice find. o7
...where we howl 1, we howl all...
If it officially comes out that Biden was an illegitimate president due to the stolen election then anything he did would be null and void.
That would be a potential trigger for suicide weekend.
Remember when Trump made a point of saying if a robber steals jewelry and is caught, can he keep it or must they give it back? Fast forward. If Biden steals $20m in laundered money can he and his family keep it or must they give it back?
As regards to Fauci, the Supreme Count can and does overrule prior SCOTUS rulings. Even though precedent is set, it can be overturned with a new case. Roe v Wade is a good example.
The case involving Biden's pardons could be challenged on the grounds that broad sweeping powers does not mean unlimited power to pardon without defining the underlining crime. If new facts become known, new victims come forward the prior pardon cannot shield the perpetrator. Otherwise, if a murderer is pardoned from death row, they could go out and commit more murders and not be charged. Also, if remains are uncovered after a pardon that shows the victim was killed by the pardoned murderer, I don't think they are off the hook.
I'm not a criminal lawyer but all laws have some limits in what they cover.
...you are sniffing the correct rabbit hole...
This actually plays into the plan. Trump wants strong states rights, he also wants the community involved in politics. The crimes will move to a state level; thank you NY for charging a federal crime on a state level.
Anything Biden did is meaningless.
“States rights” are what is fucking us in regards to the 2nd amendment....
Same for the feds that stop train loads of guns in poor areas of Chicago. Somehow those stop trains keep getting robbed? And gun violence is way up in Chicago... Hmmm.
But what if the President who issues the pardon was INVOLVED in that same crime, for which he's pardoning his fellow criminals?
That's the problem with the Biden family pardons. Joe Biden was fully involved in the family criminal organization... so his pardon of co-conspirators is actually part of the extended crimes.
SCOTUS rulings have been reversed. Consider Roe v. Wade. Consider Plessy v. Ferguson. I bet some lawfags here can name a few more.
Doggie howls Ashland.
...doggy winks...
Here's one to ponder:
If a President issues a pardon, can a President revoke a pardon?