"No amount of exaggeration about the pardon power can overcome the express mandate to the President in Art II, Sec 3."
Reposted by Kevin M. Kruse
https://bsky.app/profile/kevinmkruse.bsky.social
@earlymodjustice.bsky.social
This is a case I would love to see argued.
It’s a fundamental tension in the constitution with regard to presidential power.
Whether the pardoning power would lead to presidential corruption, and how it could be/would be limited in practice— was debated at the const. conv. & during ratification.
Max Kennerly
@maxkennerly.bsky.social
· 17h
None of these would be valid. No amount of exaggeration about the pardon power can overcome the express mandate to the President in Art II, Sec 3: "He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." He can't pardon people for breaking the law on his behalf. Contrary arguments are invalid.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-promises-mass-pardons-to-staff-before-leaving-office-d7274d32
www.wsj.com
8:20 AM · Apr 11, 2026
This is a case I would love to see argued.
— Holly Brewer (@earlymodjustice.bsky.social) 2026-04-11T12:20:29.609Z
It’s a fundamental tension in the constitution with regard to presidential power.
Whether the pardoning power would lead to presidential corruption, and how it could be/would be limited in practice— was debated at the const. conv. & during ratification.
@maxkennerly.bsky.social
None of these would be valid. No amount of exaggeration about the pardon power can overcome the express mandate to the President in Art II, Sec 3: "He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." He can't pardon people for breaking the law on his behalf. Contrary arguments are invalid.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-promises-mass-pardons-to-staff-before-leaving-office-d7274d32
www.wsj.com
8:49 PM · Apr 10, 2026
None of these would be valid. No amount of exaggeration about the pardon power can overcome the express mandate to the President in Art II, Sec 3: "He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." He can't pardon people for breaking the law on his behalf. Contrary arguments are invalid.
— Max Kennerly (@maxkennerly.bsky.social) 2026-04-11T00:49:46.882Z
= new reply since forum marked as read
…because they likely would not only uphold the absolute right of the president to pardon whoever he wanted, but would probably also rule that the use of the masculine pronoun in that passage meant that the POTUS had to be male.
