Should Trump be impeached again?

[PTWB]

27. No, that is simply a common misconception that some folks have.

I hope this post does not come across as belittling or demeaning. I'm not a very good educator and tend to be blunt.

You're simply wrong.

This idea that Trump can be impeached for various crimes, and then later prosecuted federally for crimes related to that impeachment process, and then be immune to pardon, is simply a glaring misreading of the constitution and misunderstanding of how the process works.

The consensus in the legal community is that the "cases of impeachment" exception to pardon powers ONLY prevents a president from pardoning someone who has been impeached, thus returning them to their elected position. It has nothing to do with limiting a president's ability to pardon someone who has been convicted of a crime, regardless of whether or not that crime was part of the impeachment case or not.

But don't just take my word for it, this has come up many times during the Trump years. Here is a recent example of someone (wrongly) interpreting the clause your way, and then people who know what they are talking about explaining why that person was wrong.


You may be familiar with the following (much-maligned) opinion piece by Robert Reich:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-impeached-house-literally-unpardonable-1475096

Regardless of whether a sitting president can be indicted and convicted on such criminal charges, Trump will become liable to them at some point. But could he be pardoned, as Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon 45 years ago?

Article II, section 2 of the Constitution gives a president the power to pardon anyone who has been convicted of offenses against the United States, with one exception: "In Cases of Impeachment."

If Trump is impeached by the House, he can never be pardoned for these crimes. He cannot pardon himself (it's dubious that a president has this self-pardoning power in any event), and he cannot be pardoned by a future president.

Even if a subsequent president wanted to pardon Trump in the interest of, say, domestic tranquility, she could not.

Gerald Ford wrote in his pardon of Nixon that if Nixon were indicted and subject to a criminal trial, "the tranquility to which this nation has been restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost."

Had the House impeached Nixon, Ford's hands would have been tied.

Trump isn't going to be as lucky. The House will probably impeach him before Christmas.

After that, he will be quite literally unpardonable.

Here is what constitutional law professors had to say about his (and your) interpretation of the pardoning power / impeachment cases:

https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/law-profs-robert-reichs-op-ed-on-trumps-pardon-power-got-the-impeachment-exception-wrong/

Legal Experts Take Note

Michigan State Law Professor Brian Kalt, who specializes in structural constitutional law, said that Reich was “absolutely 100% wrong,” in his interpretation of Article II, Section 2.

“Oh this is so wrong, it’s painful,” Fordham constitutional law professor Jed Shugerman wrote in response Reich’s op-ed. “He’s just making stuff up,” he added.


...


Professor Kalt then provided a brief explanation on how to properly understand the clause.

“[Reich] is badly wrong,” Kalt wrote. “The pardon power’s impeachment exception means that no president can use pardons to preempt or undo an impeachment or impeachment conviction. It does nothing—nothing!—to affect pardons relating to criminal prosecution for related offenses.”