50
Yes.
The precedent is President Gerald Ford's pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon in proclamation 4311 before any possible prosecution had started.
The pardon was granted specifically to prevent the disturbance of "the tranquility to which the nation has
been restored" by "the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United ...
46
Impeachment of a president does not on conviction automatically disqualify the convicted party from becoming president again. However, after conviction, the Senate can vote to add to the punishment of removal from office "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." This requires only a simple majority ...
38
Yes
Presidential pardons only deal with breaches of Federal law. So, if the punishment is a fine then that penalty is waived. However, if the fine is punishment for breach of state law, the pardon does not touch it - he would need a pardon from the relevant state Governor(s).
But
Anthony Levandowski is not being punished with a fine, he was punished with a ...
36
There are 2 separate issues here: what happens to such a President and what happens to the person who has been pardoned.
What happens to the person who has been pardoned?
While at least one attempt at reversing a pardon has been discussed in recent history (Clinton's pardon of Mark Rich), there is no case of a pardon that has been reversed without the wishes ...
34
Yes
The rule against prosecuting a sitting President is not a law, it is a Justice Department opinion and policy. The justification for it is that dealing with a criminal case would be severely distracting to the President, and thus harmful to the nation. Besides, the opinion goes on, any serious issue can be dealt with by impeachment. That reasoning ...
33
The executive branch of the US government, or specific parts of it, can demand that a person do particular things, when a statute has authorized such a demand. Such demands are not usually made at the level of the President of the United States, but the president could order a specific official to take such action. For example a National Security Letter ...
28
Questionable and Unsettled
First, I am not a lawyer, nor a constitutional scholar. but Ford's pardon of Nixon was never tested in court so there is no precedent here. Some would like to claim that the pardon was valid, but until there is a test, no one can really say.
The reason that it was never tested was that people were relieved to see Nixon go at the ...
27
Bribery of public officials is in itself a crime (18 USC § 201), for both the giver and the recipient:
(b) Whoever—
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official...
(A) to influence any official act; ...
(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly,...
25
When and how are pardons supposed to be used? Why does the Constitution even grant the president the power to pardon?
The Constitution provides very little guidance regarding this point, and it isn't clear that the Founders were of one mind about how it was intended to be used.
Relieving Wrongful Or Doubtful Convictions
One important point to keep in ...
22
First, there is no definitive correct answer to this question because it has never happened over the course of 45 Presidencies. But, it certainly could come up. If the President purports to pardon himself for a federal crime and is then prosecuted, the judicial branch would have to decide if the pardon was valid.
But, I would disagree with the answer from @...
19
Let's start with the most important point first:
A campaign finance violation is not a ground to remove an elected official from office, no matter how egregious, on its own, even if one could prove that the campaign finance violation probably caused the outcome of an election to change.
Congress could decide, however, that a campaign finance violation ...
18
If President Trump refuses to execute the war, does that become an act of treason on his part?
Probably not, but it depends on the definition of treason. Congress could decide that it is, impeach him, and remove him from office. They could also remove him from office without using the term treason.
Is he required to act on such a resolution?
Not ...
16
Presidential pardons can be used to pardon someone for any federal crime; if you are convicted of a state crime, the governor of that state has the right to pardon you. Impeachment is the only instance where the constitution prohibits pardons.
Of the founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton was the most supportive of Pardons and wrote about the need for them in ...
14
Yes.
The President can pardon everyone (with the possible exception of himself) of crimes, and can pardon people by category rather than by name.
But, the President can only pardon federal crimes that have been committed and are mentioned in the pardon. However, the federal crimes do not have to have resulted in convictions or even charges to be ...
12
Yes.
You can deny the President entry to your home unless the President has something that constitutes an exception to that right such as a search warrant. The President does not have any special right to trespass on private property.
You need not threaten the President to do so. You would simply say "no, I am not granting you permission to enter. Please ...
12
The language argument about the constitution is that the Constitution uses the pronoun "he" in referring to the president – they would not have used the construction "he or she", or "s/he". Article I also uses "he" to refer to qualifications of representatives and senators (residency, age). Then in creating the office of predident pro tempore of the Senate, ...
12
According to the DoJ,
A commutation may include remission (release) of the financial obligations that are imposed as part of a sentence, such as payment of a fine or restitution. A remission applies only to the part of the financial obligation that has not already been paid.
The Brookings Institute offers a slightly different (more detailed) opinion.
If a ...
11
The US legal code regarding threatening a president is 18 U.S. Code § 871 - Threats against President and successors to the Presidency. The first clause defines how threatening the president is illegal. The second clause starts off by defining "President-elect":
The terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” as used in this section shall mean such ...
11
There is no law governing the 'number' of the president. Common sense suggests that a person can't be 45th and 46th; there must be someone in between having the presidency and they will become the 46th president.
In the extremely unlikely scenario that a foreign power occupies the United States this year, eliminates the office of President, and a few years ...
11
I apologize if I'm grossly misinterpreting things here.
You are grossly misinterpreting things here. Your mistakes aren't terribly uncommon, but you are completely and totally wrong in what you are suggesting.
Does the above bolded part correspond to breaking any specific laws?
That is, how would one show that a person engaged in insurrection or
rebellion, ...
11
First of all, there is a distinction between being impeached and being convicted. Trump was impeached when the House voted to adopt an Article of Impeachment. That happened while he was still in office. He will not be convicted until the Senate votes to convict him by a 2/3rds vote, if it ever does.
In the case of Nixon, the House had not yet voted to adopt ...
10
The Twenty-fifth Amendment states:
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the
President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Thus, in the absence of a majority the candidate would be denied the office.
9
The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).
The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:
18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized
...
9
The canonical example is Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon.
9
Yes. The absence of immunity for a U.S. President's unofficial acts was established both in the Nixon Administration and later in the Clinton Administration.
In practice, a prosecutor would be loath to file such charges absent very, very solid probable cause, and a court would often be very deferential in accommodating the President's schedule and, for ...
9
There will be a gap in succession, but only briefly.
Speaker Paul Ryan's term extends past the election through the end of the 115th Congress, to 11:59:59 p.m. on January 2, 2018.
From there, the speakership is vacant until the 116th House of Representatives elects a successor. Traditionally, the House convenes at noon on January 3 of the year after an ...
8
What Is Treason?
Treason is the only crime defined in the U.S. Constitution, at Article III, Section 3 which says:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war
against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the
testimony of two witnesses to the ...
8
No
Section 2, Clause 1 says:
... and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
Impeachment is explicitly carved our from the President's power to pardon.
7
If a President uses pardons too freely, and in what seems to be a corrupt manner, Congress could, in theory, impeach the President and remove him or her from office. This has never happened. How likely it might be in future is more a subject for the politics forum.
A pardon cannot immunize a person from an individual damage suit, or even from a later ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
