Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    • Home
    • Law School News
    • In the News
    • Fordham Lawyer
    • Insider
      • Announcements
      • Class Notes
      • In Memoriam
    • For the Media
      • Media Contacts
    • News by Topic
      • Business and Financial Law
      • Clinics
      • Intellectual Property and Information Law
      • International and Human Rights Law
      • Legal Ethics and Professional Practice
      • National Security
      • Public Interest and Service
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    You are at:Home»Faculty»Constitution Limits Pardons if They Are for Self-Benefit, Law Profs Say in Op-Ed

    Constitution Limits Pardons if They Are for Self-Benefit, Law Profs Say in Op-Ed

    0
    By dduttachakraborty on March 19, 2018 Faculty, In the News

    Professors Jed Shugerman and Ethan Leib ‘s opinion piece about President Trump’s pardon power as it relates to self-protection was mentioned in an ABA Journal article.

    Jed Shugerman and Ethan Leib of Fordham University point to the “take care” clause of Article II, Section 3. The section says the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

     

    Lawyers in the 18th century used the phrase “faithfully execute” in trusts and other legal instruments to impose duties of loyalty and care to others, the law professors say.

     

    “Our Constitution’s designers wanted public officials to be subject to the same kinds of fiduciary obligations that CEOs, trustees and lawyers are routinely held to in the private sector,” they write. “Those duties prohibit self-dealing and acting under a conflict of interest.

     

    “Therefore, ‘self-pardoning’ or pardoning your closest associates for self-interested reasons should not pass legal muster, because it violates the fiduciary law of public office.”

     

    Shugerman and Leib also argue the clause could limit the president’s power to fire some officials.

     

    “Therefore, firing a special counsel for largely self-protective reasons would violate the president’s obligation to act for only the right kinds of reasons,” they argue. “With strong enough evidence of motive or purpose, a special counsel such as (Robert) Mueller might even be able to obtain an injunction to block such an impermissible firing.”

    Read full article.

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    Bloomberg Law: Prof. Bruce Green on Whether Judges Can Face Sanctions for the Kind of Errors They Find in Lawyers’ Work

    The New York Times: Prof. Bruce Green on Conflict of Interest in Epstein Scandal

    NBC New York: Prof. Martin S. Flaherty Provides Legal Opinion on Whether President Can Take Over New York City

    Comments are closed.

    • The Big Idea
    March 31, 2025

    The Big Idea: Local Politics, Reform Prosecutors, and Reshaping Mass Incarceration

    March 3, 2025

    The Big Idea: Forced Labor, Global Supply Chains, and Workers’ Rights

    November 6, 2024

    The Big Idea: Partisanship, Perception, and Prosecutorial Power

    October 3, 2024

    The Big Idea: How a Franchising Model Can Transform Worker Cooperatives

    READ MORE

    About

    Fordham University - The Jesuit University of New York

    Founded in 1841, Fordham is the Jesuit University of New York, offering exceptional education distinguished by the Jesuit tradition to more than 15,100 students in its four undergraduate colleges and its six graduate and professional schools.
    Connect With Fordham
    © 2025 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.