Does a pardon "necessitate" a confession of guilt?
“[A] pardon at some unspecified date in the future ... would not unring the bell of conviction,” federal prosecutors argued in a Jan. 6 case before U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols. “In fact, quite the opposite. The defendant would first have to accept the pardon, which necessitates a confession of guilt.”
....But Jan. 6 defendants have increasingly been seeking “pardons of innocence,” claiming Trump has the authority to grant them clemency without forcing an admission of guilt. Those who haven’t been convicted are hoping Trump’s Justice Department simply drops their charges, obviating the need for a pardon altogether.
I think everyone has it wrong here. It's true that a pardon has to be accepted—or, more accurately, not explicitly rejected—for it to take effect. It's also true that a pardon carries an "imputation" of guilt. However, it doesn't imply a personal confession of guilt. At least, the Supreme Court has never said that it does.
But the J6ers are wrong about "pardons of innocence." There's no such thing except in North Carolina, and certainly not at the federal level. Likewise, expunging criminal records is a widespread option at the state level but not at the federal level.
Of course, everyone who gets a pardon is free to say whatever they want. Gen. Mike Flynn loudly declared he had done nothing wrong and thanked President Trump for granting him a pardon of innocence, but it was all hot air. Legally, a pardon doesn't require an admission of guilt but it does imply guilt. And it doesn't wipe out the criminal acts themselves.
Note how this affects a possible prospective Biden pardon for those on Trump's enemies list. Recipients would have to live with a vague implication of guilt, but they would remain able to personally maintain their innocence. Most likely, Democrats would believe them and Republicans wouldn't, just like they do now.
The line between guilt and innocence has been so blurred that a pardon doesn't mean much these days. Congratulations Republicans!
What it means is that the individual is not subject to prosecution for that offense--alleged, or actual, or even potential.
It may not mean much to you, but I will make a wild guess that it means something to that individual.
America elected a felon as president so...
what it means is the people being subjected to trump's revenge plot won't waste all too much time in courts. of course if there was a true impartial scotus this all wouldn't necessary.
A pardon "doesn't mean much"? If it gets you out of that penitentiary so you can resume your life, it means a heck of a lot.
My guess is after the inauguration, 2.0 pardons for will transform Jan 6 into "Patriots Day"
The headline in my NY Times news email today--
Breaking news: President Biden is pardoning nearly 1,500 Americans, a record for one day
I guess that will send some Republican blood pressure readings up!
No, it will excuse anything and everything, in their eyes and in the eyes of the MSM.
NYT being Trump-slanting NYT, the actual number of 'pardons' is.......36
Red states ought to be crafting good-faith guidelines on gender-affirming care, not throwing red meat to the crowd by casually banning it completely.
Good faith? Don't you know how they play culture war games?
Again, I'm a little baffled about how even well educated and experienced people can just all jump into an alternate reality led by a totally obvious con man demagogue so readily. For the great unwashed ignorati, aleady primed by believing in ancient pre-science pre-logical thinking myths, it's no doubt easier. It has to take a serious mind warp for others. Power, or the illusion of power, I guess. Kind of like falling in love I guess, only with something ugly, awful and destructive to civilization.
I've run into this more and more often. I'm even effected by it. Educated, industrious, well-meaning people get conned all the time.
My example would be an operational supervisor of a shift in a department of a large city still believes there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and was lost in the conversation because of what he believed.
It's the quality and ease of transmission of that illusion that today is becoming even more insidious.
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
Yeah. I'm baffled too.
Especially when people who are successful and living a comfortable life under our present system are so willing to break a lot of the structure (laws, norms, institutions) that has permitted their success.
And more than that, are willing to break it without any plan for what the future will look like. None of these people would tear down their house without a plan for what happens next. But trump has none.
I would support breaking parts of the structure (e.g. for-profit health care), but I want to see a credible plan first. Too many people depend on that crappy system
I have to conclude that they don't really think trump and collaborators are serious, that it's all just meaningless talk, "politics". They want that tax cut and think the rest won't happen.
A reminder: Biden (since his legacy is already tainted) could always write up a pardon to Trump for his J6 and secret documents case, but qualify it on an admission by Trump (written in the fine print), with his signature, that he committed the crimes. Biden could publicly sell it as a means to avoid having Trump getting into the business of self-pardoning while bringing an end to his federal prosecution and ending the rift within.
Biden could pardon DJT for mishandling documents, chalking it up to an innocent mistake. If I were Joe, though, I'd want assurance that DJT didn't sell (or just show off) classified information.
In other words, the pardon is premised on a claim of innocence.