3
3
0
Should pardons even be allowed to be granted? The fact is governors and the president are not involved in individual court cases, so they lack all knowledge they need to effectively pardon someone anyhow. The arguement that they should be decided by the SCOTUS and not the executive branch could also be made. So, my answer is Bradley Manning.
Posted in these groups: 
Office of the President (POTUS)
Barack Obama
Office of the President (POTUS) Barack Obama
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
2
2
0
Since the ability to reprieve or pardon is explicitly granted to the President by the Constitution, the question's moot.
I'd expect more commutations (get out of jail early) rather than pardons.
I'd expect more commutations (get out of jail early) rather than pardons.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I do not see Manning or Snoden getting a pardon especially since it was his policies which ensured they are where they are
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
PO2 Robert Aitchison - Whaaaaaa? Hell no! Not Mr I run to China and hold up in Russia because I am such a coward .... nope neither one of them
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SSgt Boyd Herrst - i am very sure the president did not make that decision :) still makes no difference on a pardon.. nope and hell no for emphasis :)
(0)
(0)
PO2 Robert Aitchison
SGT (Join to see) - At least Snowdens leaks served the purpose of exposing illegal NSA surveillance programs. All Manning accomplished was embarrassing George W. Bush and giving our enemies more propaganda fodder. I actually believe that the country is on the whole better off for what Snowden did.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
If you don't like presidential pardons, the answer is simple.
Amend the Constitution.
The president gets his authority to pardon from Art. II, Sec. 2, Cl. 1. It is an absolute power, unchecked by the legislative or judicial branches. "A pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed." CJ Marshall, United States v. Wilson, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 150 (1833).
Amend the Constitution.
The president gets his authority to pardon from Art. II, Sec. 2, Cl. 1. It is an absolute power, unchecked by the legislative or judicial branches. "A pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed." CJ Marshall, United States v. Wilson, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 150 (1833).
(0)
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
Thats great sir, but i never said i didnt like pardons. I was simply putting forth a simple hypothetical, like folks do on here everyday. Yes, you are very correct, it would require a change to the constitution, which was exactly what i proposed. I do not believe in the notion that we should continue to do something just because it is tradition or simply because we have done it a certain way for a long time. In fact that is a silly reason. But i digress, i do not believe we should change things just for the sake of changing them either. That is the dilemma. I see nothing wrong with a congressional committee doing, say a confirmation hearing on proposed pardons/commutations. Or maybe a 3 judge panel. I am so glad you responded like you did. I learn so much from folks on here and rather enjoy the dialog. Thank you for your comments.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
The presidential pardon ability is a check on the judicial branch. You know, our Founding Fathers set up a good system and every time we change it, like the Seventeenth Amendment, we screw things up.
The problem with removing the power from the executive is that you are affecting the balance of power between the three branches.
The problem with removing the power from the executive is that you are affecting the balance of power between the three branches.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google