Short-stopping justice

Getting beyond the cynicism of announcing a controversial presidential pardon late on Friday as a killer hurricane approaches Texas, we’re left with the appalling nature of this particular pardon.

Sure, other presidents have pardoned campaign donors and various scoundrels usually in the waning days of their administrations. But this pardon for former Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio, coming a mere seven months into the Trump presidency, is of a whole other order of magnitude.

It’s not that the 85-year-old Arpaio, already dumped by voters, is a threat to society. It was the nature of his offense and the nature of the contempt of court order against him — now rendered moot by Donald Trump — that make this particular pardon a dangerous harbinger of things to come.

Arpaio’s office was charged with racially profiling Latinos, especially during traffic stops and ordering patrols aimed at picking up those of being illegal immigrants. After several years of litigation, a federal judge imposed certain requirements on the department and ordered Arpaio to cease living by his own rules. He didn’t and was subsequently held in criminal contempt. His sentencing was scheduled for October.

Trump had reportedly earlier asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions if the Justice Department could simply drop the case against Arpaio. Sessions advised that the case should run its course. Trump did not go back to Justice for its recommendation prior to issuing his pardon.

So this president, who seems to have no respect for — and surely little knowledge of — the rule of law has once again run roughshod over it.

The real question is not the sparing of one obnoxious, lawless octogenarian, but who will be next in line for a presidential pardon and under what circumstances? If Trump will use his pardon for one political crony, why not those already swept up in the Russia investigation? Why not Michael Flynn or Paul Manafort? And when does that constitute obstruction of justice?