Survey Atlasia: Do You Support Pardon Reform Take 2

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This amendment does the following:
-Bans the President from pardoning himself/herself, the Vice President or a member of the Cabinet.


- It doesn't create a new process for overriding pardons, but it preserves the previously already present allowing both Houses the ability to override pardons with a 2/3rds vote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Please feel free to discuss this proposal in here. Don't be shy!

[tmthforu94]

I oppose it and encourage my senators, Mr. R and Haslam, to vote Nay, as well as representatives when it is voted on there. I'm not sure a president should be able to pardon themselves, but I don't see why we are passing a constitutional amendment regarding their VP and cabinet.

Debate has been lacking and that is OK on smaller bills, but not on constitutional amendments. Concerns with the War Powers Amendment weren't brought up until the vote was starting, now this one is being voted on with little input from legislators. The presidency in Atlasia is not a sexy position, why do we keep trying to take away the powers that actually could help make it more intriguing?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I oppose it and encourage my senators, Mr. R and Haslam, to vote Nay, as well as representatives when it is voted on there. I'm not sure a president should be able to pardon themselves, but I don't see why we are passing a constitutional amendment regarding their VP and cabinet.

Debate has been lacking and that is OK on smaller bills, but not on constitutional amendments. Concerns with the War Powers Amendment weren't brought up until the vote was starting, now this one is being voted on with little input from legislators. The presidency in Atlasia is not a sexy position, why do we keep trying to take away the powers that actually could help make it more intriguing?

The cabinet and VP were actually added as a result of feedback and concerns I received during the composition process.

Both of these amendments were debated in the previous congress in different forms and defeated. That is largely why debate was lacking this time, because they were intensely debated previously. I removed and altered the provisions that were the source of opposition in that Congress.

The same goes for War Powers. The provisions that motivated the opposition in the 12th Congress were removed when I offered them.

[Poirot]

Is the VP and Cabinet while they are in office? Because they just have to resign their position to be  pardoned. If they commited a major crime they are probably not in office anymore so regular citizens.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And I really do hope that War Powers is passed in the South. We have been kicking this around since OCTOBER, trying to find a way to prevent a repeat of the administrative break down that got us into Korea in the first place. Since then we have not one, but two foreign conflicts so I think the impetus should be rather clear to have some kind of provisions requiring consultations with responsible members of the cabinet before using force.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is the VP and Cabinet while they are in office? Because they just have to resign their position to be  pardoned. If they commited a major crime they are probably not in office anymore so regular citizens.

While the current President is in office they could not be pardoned for actions they committed while in office. The purpose of the clause was to prevent a situation where a Secretary engages in an illegal act for the President and the President comes back and rewards them with a pardon for it.

This way it encourages the cabinet to put the interest of the people first and not be tempted to engage in illegal behavior for the President.

[tmthforu94]

Is the VP and Cabinet while they are in office? Because they just have to resign their position to be  pardoned. If they commited a major crime they are probably not in office anymore so regular citizens.

While the current President is in office they could not be pardoned for actions they committed while in office. The purpose of the clause was to prevent a situation where a Secretary engages in an illegal act for the President and the President comes back and rewards them with a pardon for it.

This way it encourages the cabinet to put the interest of the people first and not be tempted to engage in illegal behavior for the President.

I think Poirot's point still stands - if a cabinet member breaks a law that could result in punishment from the Supreme Court, what is to stop them from just resigning so that they can be pardoned?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is the VP and Cabinet while they are in office? Because they just have to resign their position to be  pardoned. If they commited a major crime they are probably not in office anymore so regular citizens.

While the current President is in office they could not be pardoned for actions they committed while in office. The purpose of the clause was to prevent a situation where a Secretary engages in an illegal act for the President and the President comes back and rewards them with a pardon for it.

This way it encourages the cabinet to put the interest of the people first and not be tempted to engage in illegal behavior for the President.

I think Poirot's point still stands - if a cabinet member breaks a law that could result in punishment from the Supreme Court, what is to stop them from just resigning so that they can be pardoned?

It would still be prohibited. OSR brought up the example of Gerald Ford pardoning Nixon, that would not be affected because it is a different President and yes there is a potential for abuse there as well but you have to cut it off somewhere.

I would point out that House debate is still ongoing, though a final vote motion was made yesterday: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=296753.0

So if the desire is for tighter language in this regards there is still a chance to do that, but in terms of my interpretation and my reading of the text I think that such is barred when it comes to the scenario of the crime committed while they served in said capacity.

Of course different courts can interpret things different ways and future Presidents may look for any number of loopholes to slip through and ultimately the final protection against that is Impeachment.

[Wisconsin+17]

I will be voting NAY as well. I believe that pardons are an appropriate part of the powers of the executive per the present constitution.

As for the Nixon pardon, I actually support the pardon given to Nixon.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will be voting NAY as well. I believe that pardons are an appropriate part of the powers of the executive per the present constitution.

As for the Nixon pardon, I actually support the pardon given to Nixon.

Nixon pardon would still be legal under this amendment.

[Wisconsin+17]

I am happy with the constitution at present. I can understand the desire of congress to tighten things up but I do not agree with the necessity of their present changes.

Nothing against you, Yankee. I appreciate you putting this up for discussion.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have crafted a text that make it more clear that this resign to be pardoned loophole is barred. OneJ offered it as an amendment to the House version.

[Poirot]

I understand you are trying to close a possible loophole but the formerly held positions in their administration part is quite large. If someone is Secretary of Interior for a couple of weeks at the beginning of the president's term, is no longer in Cabinet, commits a crime that is not related to the administration, the citizen could have to wait 6 or 7 months for a change of President to get a pardon.

"and no President may pardon their Vice President or the principle officers in the cabinet or people who formerly held such positions in their administration;"

I haven't read how the VP and Cabinet part were brought and the possibility of the administration colluding in crime. I don't know what type of crime agreed by conspiracy we are trying to stop. I thought this was supposed to be about forbiding the President to pardon oneself. I find including other people difficult to apply with a time frame being in Cabinet and the crime by a Cabinet or former Cabinet member not necessarily be something the President is linked to, things like that. Congress has a a power on pardon so there is already an oversight. I'm not sure I like that oversight because it could be partisan, to stop someone from returning so a problem like the President being able to pardon anyone. I think I'm nay if it covers more than the President because I don't like how this will be applicable fairly.   

[Poirot]

"and no President may pardon their Vice President or the principle officers in the cabinet or people who formerly held such positions in their administration;"

Is there an official list of what job is considered principle officers? I'm not sure who is included under that label. Is the GM such an offficer? The archivist? and what if there is a team of archivist and not one archivist? I imagine the Secreatry of Elections is an officer but what about the Deputy SoFE who has ran an election in place of the SoFE ?

We would also need a list of all principle officers who served under every President. For instance I don't rememeber who served in the NCYankee administration more than one year ago. Those people would not be eligible for pardon by NCYankee.

[tmthforu94]

Just curious, how many times has someone been pardoned in Atlasia? I don't recall any instances.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Just curious, how many times has someone been pardoned in Atlasia? I don't recall any instances.

Its a YUGE crisis ... because Trump!