Presidential Pardon Limitation Amendment (Failed)

[Leinad]

I suppose, as the sponsor, I have the authority to speak on this? (I assume I do...apologies if not...)

I think it would make more sense to talk about the two amendments in separate threads, as they are exclusively separate amendments, even though they do amend the same article.

Regarding the amendment itself, my pitch is basically there in the introduction. Checks and balances.

[Leinad]

I don't suppose we could eliminate the presidential pardon althogether, right? I advocate for more power to the executive, but that particular one is just too easy to abuse despite limitations.

I think there's still some merit to Presidential pardons (a mechanism to correct bad court decisions without much fuss), but I wouldn't be against either lowing the number needed to overturn the pardon, or even doing away with it.

You're certainly right that it's too easy to abuse, hence this amendment.

[Leinad]

I know I'm not a Senator, but I think the fact I proposed the bill allows me to briefly chime in here with a correction: this is not taking powers away from the President. Not at all. It just keeps the President from doing whatever the heck he wants with it. Checks and balances shouldn't be confused with eliminating Presidential power.

To reiterate: if this amendment, as I wrote it, passes, the President will still be able to pardon people. It's just that the pardons will be overturned if 3/4ths of all Senators (currently 8/10, to round it up) agree it was a bad decision. That means that 7 Senators can vote against the pardon, and it's not overturned! The President still has the power to pardon whoever he wants (except himself, of course), the only way out of that being if a super-supermajority of all but 2 decide to overturn it!

Hardly stripping the position of all power, as you 3 insinuated, if you ask me.

[Leinad]

Ah well, I thought it was a good idea.

With such a large majority required it would only be used when the president is ineffective (inactive, going crazy, etc). I approve of this restraint on the executive.

This is about exactly right. I'm flabbergasted how multiple people seemed to think it would strip the President of all powers, when all it does is make it harder for a President to abuse a rarely-used power.

In fact, I'm surprised this amendment didn't pass 10-0. It seems obvious, but maybe I value checks and balances more than most.