Extent of the Presidential Pardon in the Constitution of the United States of America

The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. Article II, Section 2 (Item 1).

I am not a Fan of Donald J. Trump Sr, the 45th President of the United States of America. He knows this. He responded to me once. Anyone else familiar with my Tweets know it too. Trump Sr is also aware, as those conversant with my writing, that I tell it as it is. I take no one’s Side. I am for the honest Commentary, as revealed after I have triangulated Pieces of Information, including Facts. It is in this Regard that I find it deceitful for anyone to hold Trump Sr culpable and/or rebukable for the Pardons he has been bestowing. He should not be chastised for these Pardons he is dispensing. 

The relevant Part of Article II, as I have highlighted above, is clear that the Pardon is for politico-criminal Offences. Such Offenses would be something like Sedition and Treason. Presidents before Trump abused the Proviso of the Pardon in their different Ways through Presidential Tradition. That Donald J. Trump is not to our Liking because of the kind of abominable Person that he is does not absolve us of Unfairness to him. 

Article II is certain that the Pardon is applicable only after Conviction not before. It is also conclusive that the President of the United States cannot pardon herself or himself. Take my Views to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, @USSupremeCourt, and find out how the Justices will rule. 

The criminal Offence, sui generis, no matter how abhorrent is not “Offense against” any State, but Harm to a Person and/or Breach of the Law. The State is the Amalgamation of ‘the People’, the Territory, and the Government.1

My Position that the Pardon cannot be prospective is reinforced by the Supreme Court of the United States in Burdick v. US 236 U.S. 79 (1915). Yet, it is this very Case that unsound Commentators have referred to in Support of the Nonsense that the presidential Power of Pardon can be anticipatory (or that it has No-Limit). Such is the Danger with so-called Experts never consulting original Sources themselves. They, instead, regurgitate what Others have written, who perhaps never looked up primary Sources. If they did look at these Sources, they probably did not understand  what they were reading. I contradicted many, including academic Professors, during my academic Studies. Some Commentators simply relied on reporting by Journalists but represent them as academic Truths. 

I had written the first four Paragraphs above in Series to be tweeted before deciding to search for how the Supreme Court has ruled on the Breadth of the Presidential Pardon if it had ever done. It is how I stumbled upon Burdick. 

Justice McKenna who delivered the Opinion of the Supreme Court in Burdick stated: 

In our view of the case it is not material to decide whether the pardoning power may be exercised before Conviction. … To hold that the principle of United States v. Wilson [32 U.S. 7 Pet. 150 150 (1833)] was expressed only as to conditional pardons would be to assert that the language and illustrations which were used to emphasize the principle announced were meant only to destroy it. Besides, the pardon passed on was not conditional. It was limited in that – and only in that – it was confined to the crime for which the defendant had been convicted … This was its emphasis and distinction … Other charges were pending … and it was expressed that the pardon should not extend to them. But such would have been its effect without expression. [My Emphasis] 

"... it was expressed that the pardon should not extend to them. But such would have been its effect without the expression" would confuse many. One; if they do not have a solid Grasp of the English Language and its Nuances. Two; if they read the Phrases in Isolation to the whole of the Opinion. Even before now, I had been writing my Opinion on the presidential Pardon since, i.e., https://twitter.com/IP_dan_Iyan/status/1327090450185023489?s=19 and https://twitter.com/IP_dan_Iyan/status/1333928994388008962?s=19 and https://twitter.com/IP_dan_Iyan/status/1333940744705466368?s=19 The Pardon cannot be granted in the Absence of criminal Conviction. An Incumbent President cannot pardon herself or himself under any Circumstance, period. 

Endnote

1For the Definition of State, see dan Iyan, I. P., The New World Order 1986 to 1999: The Behaviour of the United States Within United Nations Security Council Responses to Global Conflicts, Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen,

Ipemndoh dan Iyan PhM©

AsimauGlobalMedia© 

All Rights 2020

25 December