Constitutional Amendment (Passed)

[Oakvale]

A simpler way to ease these concerns as well as removing the power of a president to pardon themselves is to make it so that each pardon has to be individually posted. This would make it far trickier to enact blanket pardons.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would suggest that the Senate think very carefully on this matter and try not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The current - extraordinarily broad - Presidential pardoning powers were added to the Constitution in an attempt to correct a severe oversight; previous constitutions had not included specific pardoning powers and so Presidents had pardoned based on tradition. The Court eventually ruled against this, leaving the Executive with no power to pardon whatsoever. The broad and sweeping powers that have caused the current controversy were most likely not intended to be nearly so broad and sweeping as they have turned out. Please be extremely careful as to how you phrase any modification to the Constitution: previous Senates and ConCons have tended (alas!) not to be.

I would also like to point out that Constitution as it currently stands restricts the Presidency to the point of emasculation (largely to the benefit of this very legislature, actually), and also that an openly-worded piece of constitutional text can be read in multiple ways. There is nothing in the Constitution as presently written that expressly prohibits the overturning of previous Presidential pardons.

[Cranberry]

I can see your points, oakvale, and they do make sense to me. There are some rulings that I guess should be pardoned somewhere down the road (Snowstalker), and since they were ruled with this pardoning in mind, it would be quite hard for the individuals in question if they were suddenly to be stripped of their only option to partcipate in Atlasia again.
It is however also evident that something must be done to the excess of presidential veto powers - hence why I propose just leaving the bill the way it is - prohibiting presidentials pardons for the presidents themselves, but going no further.
I doubt, to refer to the point the Attorney General made, that this modification would have wide, unforseen consequences, but I am neither native speaker of English nor in any kind familiar with legal texts so I am the last person in this body able to give judgement on that.

[Oakvale]

I certainly understand the drive to combat abuse of this power, and I think Polnut's original amendment makes a lot of sense, but I have to second Al's points - the Presidency is an absurdly weak office as it stands. Pardon power is basically the only meaningful executive power we have.

I have some experience in both Atlasian law and drafting constitutions so I'd be happy to consult with the Senate on drafting a text that avoids ambiguity.

[Sec. of State Superique]

As I am the constituent that Polnut was referring, I might say that I'm glad that most of the Senate is favorable to the idea exposed in this Ammendment (and by the way, I'm fine with a grammar adaptation due to TNF's gender concern). It is a serious problem when a Constitution allows its own President to pardon himself of the crimes that he might have committed. As we have seen recently in Tyrion's case, the Courts were not legally able to do a single thing to punish much of his wrong-doings and this is absolutely wrong. This a legal precedent that must be erased by a proper amendment.

Granting the citizen the power to pardon himself is a huge contradiction to one of the most basic principles of our Constitution: equality for all citizens. Furthermore, it basically allows the President to do whatever it pleases as long as he pardons himself in the end. He can murder political enemies, have sex in the White House garden with Monica Lewinsky and even publicly support terrorist actions and Nazi Hate speech and there won't be a single judicial mechanism to punish him.

I thank the honorable gentlemen. Now I need to solve a deeply disturbing problem.

[windjammer]

Polnut's amendment has been adopted.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I support the right to pardon, but self-pardoning which is a) legal currently and b) has happened is plain ridiculous.

[Senator Cris]

I express again my support for this amendment, as it stands.
I don't think it's a good thing having the president that can pardon himself. As pointed out by Superique, it's a contradiction to the principle of equality for all citizens of Atlasia. I think that this needs to be fixed and this amendment will have my support.

[Cranberry]

To reiterate my former point and the conclusion nearly everyone seems to have gotten, I do support the amendment as it stands, eliminating just the right for presidents to pardon themselves.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would kindly urge the members of this august chamber to read the relevant section of the Constitution as it is presently written:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And now ask yourselves: what isn't there? Nothing says that a President cannot repeal the pardons given by past Presidents.

[Talleyrand]

Constitutional Amendment

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proposing this amendment.

[Senator Cris]

I object.

[TNF]

This is pretty straight forward, I'm not sure how anyone can support allowing a President to undo a pardon done by his or her predecessor.

[Sec. of State Superique]

Constitutional Amendment

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proposing this amendment.

Wait a second. Are you trying to change the whole nature of the Amendment? When I asked Polnut to send this amendment to the Senate, it was with the purpose to prevent that other citizens do what Tyrion did. I'm fine with the idea of preventing a President to repeal prior pardons, but I don't think that this requires the exclusion of the clause that ensured that the Head of State could not pardon himself. I call the Senate to Object this Amendment on the Constitutional Amendment.

[Talleyrand]

Yes, I am. There is no reason why if the president is given the power to pardon literally any citizen in Atlasia other than in cases of impeachment, he should not have the discretion to use that power on himself. Keep in mind even if he or she were foolish enough to do so, they could easily be impeached for that.

[Sec. of State Superique]

Yes, I am. There is no reason why if the president is given the power to pardon literally any citizen in Atlasia other than in cases of impeachment, he should not have the discretion to use that power on himself. Keep in mind even if he or she were foolish enough to do so, they could easily be impeached for that.

And what happens when the President that pardons himself has a very strong political support? He can easily resign and then get elected to any office that he wants. The problem from the previous situation remains the same, the President basically can run away of every single judicial consequence. I'm not sure if the Senate can impeach someone who has already resigned, but, as far as I'm concerned, this is impossible. In Brazil, President Collor tried to resign but the Senate did not recognize his letter of resignation, in the end, he was Impeached, but I don't believe that is allowed in the Atlasian Constitution.

[Oakvale]

"If the President can pardon people he should be able to pardon himself" is utterly bonkers logic.

[windjammer]

I object.

[Barnes]

If you really care about gender neutrality (although as far as Atlasia goes, what's the chance that it will actually come into practice?) you could use "Hen" like the Swedes.

[Lief 🗽]

I support Comrade-Senator Talleyrand's amendment.

[windjammer]

A vote on Talleyrand's amendment is now open. Please, vote AYE, NAY or Abstain.

[windjammer]

I support bore's change. But talleyrand's amendment strips former Polnut's changes that I supported.

So NAY

[Talleyrand]

AYE

[Lief 🗽]

AYE

[Senator Cris]

Nay