Presidential pardons...

[Boerseun]

When we live in a country under the Rule of Law, by what right can a president pardon anybody?

(This thread has nothing to do with the pros and/or cons of the Death Penalty - so let's not get sidetracked)

 

Say a murderer in the US was given the Death Penalty. He's on his way to be gassed/injected/hanged/electrocuted - the method is immaterial. A few minutes before the deadline, all his appeals have failed, the Court decided he must be permanently removed from society. The only thing that can save him now, is a pardon from the Governor or the President (I'm actually not sure if the President, being a federal badge-holder, can pardon State prisoners - but the Governor surely can - same argument).

 

Governors and Presidents are elected officials. By what right, seeing as we'd like to believe that the US is run by the Rule of Law, can an elected official, who have probably not even folowed the court case, decide that he knows better than the court? The Governor/President can overrule the court's decision without even giving so much as a reason. They can't change the verdict from guilty to not guilty, but they can commute death sentences to life at their own discretion.

 

I'm not debating the pro's and/or con's of this practice, nor that of the Death Penalty - I just want to figure out what the rationale behind this might be - and whether this doesn't erode our concept of the "Rule of Law".

[moo]

I just want to figure out what the rationale behind this might be

I'm sure Richard Nixon could have rationalized it from his point of view... :doh:

 

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa022501a.htm

Excerpt: What the Founders said

The whole subject of presidential pardons stirred little debate at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. No less estimable Founding Father than Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist No. 74, suggests that, "... in seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility of the commonwealth."

 

While a few Founders suggested involving Congress in the pardons business, Hamilton remained certain the power should rest solely with the president. "It is not to be doubted, that a single man of prudence and good sense is better fitted, in delicate conjunctures, to balance the motives which may plead for and against the remission of the punishment, than any numerous body [Congress] whatever," he writes in Federalist No. 74.

 

moo

[cwes99_03]

Did anybody watch the latest episodes of Battelstar Galactica? Similar thoughts there. The president elected to pardon all for their involvement with the Cylons after they were able to get off of New Caprica rather than begin a struggle over whether to convict persons for their role. Of course, this dealt with secret juries and evidence and whatnot (hmm sound familiar.)

 

Anyway, the idea was for mercy and the betterment of the society, but again major loopholes existed allowing anyone to be pardoned for any offense. Occasionally this is made fun of such as a president pardoning a turkey around thanks giving or whatever.

 

Interesting thing to think about, but I don't know that there is a whole lot to be argued here on the point.

[Jay-qu]

It might be a throwback to the old days, when the elected leader had more to do with the everyday processes within a society :)

[InfiniteNow]

When we live in a country under the Rule of Law, by what right can a president pardon anybody?... I just want to figure out what the rationale behind this might be.

Ego boost. A legislated way to show that despite the elected official being a representative of the people, they are granted privileges which make them "better." IMO, that is... If you want something more satisfying, check out below.

 

 

A good selection of links allowing for exploration of the various topics of Presidential Pardon/Executive Clemency