It's time to get more clarity about presidential pardons.

[Baitball Blogger]

Someone needs to challenge Trump in court so the conservative Supreme Court will have a chance to weigh in. Yes, a conservative court is best, because whatever they say conservatives can no longer challenge.

And, once we know what we have to work with, we can begin the process of gathering support for the necessary Constitutional challenges.

In the past we just assumed all our presidents would be honorable. Trump showed us the error of our ways. We need to prepare for worst.

[bullimiami]

1. You need to challenge to see if scotus will accept limits.

Don’t know until you try.

[Baitball Blogger]

2. This is what the right has been doing over the last 30 years.

Challenging our laws in court. From property rights at the local level, to every aspect of government where the law goes against them.

We need to get proactive.

[elleng]

3. Presidents

. . .shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment.'

The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the provision to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites and amnesties.[11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_pardons_in_the_United_States#:~:text=The%20pardon%20power%20of%20the,Clause%201)%2C%20which%20provides%3A&text=shall%20have%20Power%20to%20grant,except%20in%20Cases%20of%20impeachment.

[allnews]

4. Yes I wish they would not just accept this.

I’m tired of the double standard. If it was a Democrat it’d be so different. When I think about Clinton with the Marc Rich pardon and what he went through grrr

[abqtommy]

5. "In the past we just assumed all our presidents would be honorable"... Except for Nixon and

Reagan and W. Bush... and we did learn but then we didn't vote for tRUMP or support him.
Unfortunately, some people didn't learn!

[PoliticAverse]

6. "In the past we just assumed all our presidents would be honorable" - actually no...

In the debating when the Constitution was being written the question of what happens when a dishonorable President issues corrupt pardons and the answer was "impeachment".

See: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/07/25/the-pardon-power-and-original-intent/

“There is one security in this case to which gentlemen may not have adverted: if the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty.”

[abqtommy]

8. So why did the Senate get involved? We gotta make some serious changes...

[brooklynite]

7. I'm willing to bet anySC decision on Presidential Pardons would include the liberal Justices...

The Constitution is fairly explicit.