Quote of the Day
Luther Martin reacts to the Libby pardon:
The power given to the President of granting reprieves and pardons, was also thought extremely dangerous, and as such opposed–The President thereby has the power of pardoning those who are guilty of treason, as well as of other offences; it was said that no treason was so likely to take place as that in which the President himself might be engaged–The attempt to assume to himself powers not given by the constitution, and establish himself in regal authority; in which attempt a provision is made for him to secure from punishment the creatures of his ambition, the associates and abettors of his treasonable practices, by granting them pardons should they be defeated in their attempts to subvert the constitution.
Good heavens, did I write “reacts?” I meant predicts.
Comment by Thoreau —
July 3, 2007 @ 7:37 am
Good find.
I still think it’s better that the state’s potential power for mercy be unlimited, but I also think that Presidents need to be kept on short leashes when their powers (for mercy or anything else) are abused.
Call your Congressman.
Comment by mb —
July 3, 2007 @ 8:04 am
Presidential pardon power should be abolished. I understand why it’s nice in theory, but in practice it has amounted to little more than (a) a way for rich contributors to buy pardons, as in the case of Scooter’s former client Marc Rich, or (b) an understood grant of carte blanche to the president’s underlings. It means that there are no legal remedies for executive branch malfeasance short of impeachment, which we’re constantly told is such a radical measure that it must never be used.
Comment by Barry —
July 3, 2007 @ 8:21 am
And impeachment is a terribly difficult thing to do (I’m including conviction here). A two-thirds majority of the Senate is a deliberate high bar, to make sure that some things are very difficult. When such a bar needs to be cleared to punish clear and obvious crimes commited under presidential sanction, it’s ‘carte blanche’, for all practical purposes.
Comment by Matt Weiner —
July 3, 2007 @ 8:30 am
As Bruce Moomaw was pointing out at Yglesias’s, the impeachment provisions were written under the assumption that there wouldn’t be political parties.
Comment by Eric the .5b —
July 3, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
The Constitution was written under the assumption that there wouldn’t be political parties. (I’d say “Deal.”, but that would require the Constitution to matter.)