The Palm Beach Post

Would pardons really protect the president from legal jeopardy?

- FRANK ASKIN, DELRAY BEACH Editor’s note: Askin is professor emeritus, Rutgers School of Law (Newark), and general counsel emeritus of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Cronies of President Donald Trump appear to be singing a new refrain to the tune of “Chattanoog­a Choo-Choo”: “Pardon me Boss, cause else I might accuse you.” Or as Trump’s alter ego Rudy Giuliani put it: “When the whole thing’s over, things might get cleared up with some presidenti­al pardons.”

Which raises the question: Will pardons really protect President Trump from legal jeopardy? And the answer depends on which constituti­onal expert you ask.

On the one hand, there are those who say a sitting president cannot be indicted for acts committed while in office. If that’s the case, pardons are probably irrelevant. Since the only threat to Trump would be impeachmen­t; and so long as there is a large Republican Senate contingent, impeachmen­t is not a serious threat.

But suppose the crime preceded the president’s taking office?

Indeed, in the pending defamation suit against Trump for calling her a liar during the election campaign, Summer Zervos, a former “The Apprentice” contestant who had accused Trump of sexual assault, a judge denied the president’s motion to dismiss, commenting “no one is above the law.”

And criminal prosecutio­n might be even less burdensome to sitting presidents. In a criminal case, a defendant cannot be subjected to deposition­s as they would be in a civil proceeding.

Furthermor­e, not all experts agree that the president cannot be criminally charged for offenses such as “obstructio­n of justice.” In that case, pardons could come into play. But would they really protect the president?

The answer there is “maybe.” If the defendant were charged with a crime, the president could issue a pardon either before or after conviction. But once pardoned, the person loses his/her Fifth Amendment right to refuse to testify on grounds of self-incriminat­ion. If the person refused to testify, the sanction would be for contempt of court. The president might then issue a second pardon but that would clearly be obstructio­n of justice if he was keeping somebody from testifying against himself!

Plus, a president can only pardon offenses against federal law. If the offense might also violate state law — such as money laundering — the pardoned one can still be forced to testify in a state proceeding.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States