Posted on Sep 19, 2017
Federal Judge in Arpaio Case Prepares to Rule Trump Pardon Unconstitutional
1.25K
11
11
3
3
0
And yet the thousands of pardons by previous presidents were all ok?
IT IS THE PRESIDENTS PREROGATIVE!
IT IS THE PRESIDENTS PREROGATIVE!
Federal Judge in Arpaio Case Prepares to Rule Trump Pardon Unconstitutional
Posted from thenewamerican.comPosted in these groups: 
Judiciary
Judiciary
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
MSgt Danny Hope Check out the responses from Capt Gregory Prickett on the other discussion board this article may not be too factual to what is actually happening.
https://www.rallypoint.com/shared-links/federal-judge-in-arpaio-case-prepares-to-rule-trump-pardon-unconstitutional--2?urlhash=2932709
https://www.rallypoint.com/shared-links/federal-judge-in-arpaio-case-prepares-to-rule-trump-pardon-unconstitutional--2?urlhash=2932709
Federal Judge in Arpaio Case Prepares to Rule Trump Pardon Unconstitutional | RallyPoint
Is this judge fighting a battle he can't win? Where's the precedence?
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
He was found guilty of crime. He is a criminal, albeit a pardoned criminal. What he wants is for the conviction to be vacated, because he can not be punished for his crime. The judge has (rightfully) refused, even though the pardon means Arpaio will not have to serve any time.
Arpaio is a convicted criminal, a pardon can not change that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/us/sheriff-joe-arpaio-convicted-arizona.html
Arpaio is a convicted criminal, a pardon can not change that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/us/sheriff-joe-arpaio-convicted-arizona.html
Former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio Is Convicted of Criminal Contempt
Prosecutors said he defied a judge’s orders to stop targeting Latinos — including citizens and legal immigrants — in a pattern of discriminatory policing.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
MCPO Roger Collins - That is an opinion based on legal precedent. Ex parte Garland dealt with a Presidential pardon for a former Confederate Official. The official was not convicted of any crime, he was simply ineligible to serve based on having been a member of the Confederate government. It's an apples and oranges, the Presidential pardon made it so that all those restrictions normally imposed on someone for having been a member of the Confederate government didn't apply to him.
Arpaio is still a criminal, just as Garland was still a former Confederate Senator. The pardon simply removed any and all penalties or restrictions they might otherwise face that are associated with the crime for which they were pardoned.
Arpaio is still a criminal, just as Garland was still a former Confederate Senator. The pardon simply removed any and all penalties or restrictions they might otherwise face that are associated with the crime for which they were pardoned.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
SSG (Join to see) - What was really stated in the opinion.
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/89/pardon-power
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/89/pardon-power
(0)
(0)
SN Ron Jett
SSG (Join to see) - That is not an opinion based on legal precedent. It is from the Constitution.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
"...and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
You can not be forgiven for an offense you did not commit.
In a 3 to 2 decision shortly after the civil war the Supreme court barely interpreted that to mean, that a pardon did not just mitigate any punishment, it also ensured that the person pardoned was not ineligible for anything because of that conviction. In that case a pardoned Confederate Senator could still hold Federal office. That however, is not the same thing as declaring someone convicted in a court of law to be innocent by presidential proclamation. The President can ensure that no punishment is handed out and that the crime is completely forgiven by civil society, however they can not change the fact that the crime took place and that the individual was found guilty of that crime.
Arpaio will never face punishment for his crimes because of the Presidential pardon even though he was convicted in a court of law. The pardon doesn't make him innocent, it simply means the government can not punish him. You can not be forgiven for an offense you did not commit.
You can not be forgiven for an offense you did not commit.
In a 3 to 2 decision shortly after the civil war the Supreme court barely interpreted that to mean, that a pardon did not just mitigate any punishment, it also ensured that the person pardoned was not ineligible for anything because of that conviction. In that case a pardoned Confederate Senator could still hold Federal office. That however, is not the same thing as declaring someone convicted in a court of law to be innocent by presidential proclamation. The President can ensure that no punishment is handed out and that the crime is completely forgiven by civil society, however they can not change the fact that the crime took place and that the individual was found guilty of that crime.
Arpaio will never face punishment for his crimes because of the Presidential pardon even though he was convicted in a court of law. The pardon doesn't make him innocent, it simply means the government can not punish him. You can not be forgiven for an offense you did not commit.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google