Fordham Law Professor Ethan J. Leib explains to Newsweek whether presidential self-pardons violate the Constitution’s principles and the presidential oath, which prohibits self-dealing.
Ethan J. Leib, a law professor at Fordham University, argued that while some, including Trump, claim there would be nothing wrong with a president pardoning themselves, such an act would violate the Constitution’s principles and the presidential oath, which prohibits self-dealing.
“I think it’s important to note that it’s wrong for President Trump to engage in self-benefit, and it’s equally wrong for President Biden. Both should be criticized. However, there are differences. The idea of Trump pardoning himself for his own legal conduct goes a step further than pardoning one’s son,” Leib told Newsweek.
On one hand, Leib said, such a move from Trump would align with his norm-defying approach to the presidency. On the other, it would conflict with his repeated assertion that he has done nothing wrong for which he requires clemency.
Since presidential pardons do not apply to state crimes, the president-elect would have difficulty pardoning himself for any of the cases outside federal court, such as the election interference case in Fulton County, Georgia or the hush-money conviction in New York.
Despite that, Leib expressed doubt that any court would overturn a presidential self-pardon.
“Historically, courts have not been aggressive in supervising or overseeing the use of the pardon power. It’s considered an ‘apolitical question,’ and courts often avoid such disputes,” he said.
Read “Joe Biden’s Pardon of Hunter Lowers Bar for Trump’s Potential Self-Pardon” in Newsweek.
