Is it time to amend the Constitution to restrict the power of pardon?

[backscatter712]

Yeah, Bush's letter stunt with Karl Rove is bringing this up.

I'd recommend that the amendment do a few things.

1. Require that a pardon be for a specific crime, for which a person has been convicted. In other words, you can't pull a Ford and pardon someone who hasn't even been indicted. The President must pardon a specific crime, and there must be a conviction - he can't pardon a person out of an indictment.

2. Forbid the President from pardoning anyone who worked in the Executive branch, or has a conflict-of-interest link to the President without the consent of the Senate - a majority vote.

3. Forbid the President from pardoning himself under any circumstances.

Any other ideas?

[Warren Stupidity]

1. No - and this was not a pardon, amnesty, or repreive.

This latest Bush stunt was a bizarre expression of executive privilege. I doubt it will stand up.

I'm fine with leaving the pardon power right where it is.

[ThomWV]

2. I think that all pardons should be subject to a 50%+1 vote in the house

Let the people have the final say if they agree with the President's pardon by simple majority.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. no thanks

the power allows for an adjustment of judicial wrong doing no matter how unpopular it might be. That is a very important safety net, even if it allows for corrupt abuse. One person's Nixon Pardon Outrage is another person's Blanket Amnesty for Draft Resisters.

[bluestateguy]

8. Thats right

99% of the time, the pardon is used responsibly. Even most of Bush's pardons were uncontroversial (like pardoning old men in Tennessee for running moonshine 35 years ago). Bush was, if anything, far too stingy with the pardon.

If the Congress was allowed to veto pardons, we could have seen, for example, the Republican Congress overturn Clinton's pardon of Susan McDougal, who was railroaded by Ken Starr's Wastewater investigation.

[bluestateguy]

3. NO.

I want President Obama to have those powers.

[backscatter712]

7. I'm not suggesting getting rid of the pardon entirely.

I'm suggesting restricting it in cases where there are obvious conflicts-of-interest. Make it so you can't pardon your own political advisors or cabinet members, for example.

[movonne]

4. I agree with you and you three points...

[Still Sensible]

6. Absolutely not

[47of74]

9. Yes.

I too think that the power to pardon people for crimes and the commutation of sentences needs to be tightened up a bit. I think too often it's used for unjust ends - by people of either party - and I think there needs to be some control on it.

After Libby got a get out of jail free card from President Corruptus in Extremeis I wrote a LTTE to the local paper on this subject. I suggested that Article II section II be amended in the following manner;

...Limits could include a minimum amount of time to pass before a pardon or commutation could be granted, unless Congress assents. Maybe give the president only one exception -- that he or she can commute a death sentence down to life imprisonment.

I think amending the Constitution to tighten up the reins on pardoning/commutation is a lot better than amending it to tell people who they can or cannot marry, or which language will be spoken in public.

[ThoughtCriminal]

10. I remember bringing this up #1 suggestion here in 2002

Got almost nothing but flames and still don't understand why. It would still provide the protection from injustices that pardons were intended and avoid the repeated abuse.

[Thothmes]

11. Do not forget to forbid pardons for anyone that

contributes to a presidential foundation.