I'm not an attorney.

[griffi94]

I am married to an attorney and she belongs to a few online lawyer groups.
One of the lawyers in one of the groups she belongs to had an interesting take
on why Nancy Pelosi may be delaying sending the articles of impeachment to the senate.

Here's the post.
" Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 of The U.S. Constitution says that a president cannot pardon someone who was impeached. By not letting the Senate acquit him, she is setting Trump up for a future criminal conviction after he leaves office from which he can't be pardoned by his successor. She is, literally, locking him up."

[beachbumbob]

1. impeached or "removed from office"?

I rid the clause again, trump will not be able to be pardoned.

NEED TO IMPEACH BILL BARR ASAP

[griffi94]

5. As I understand it

The lack of an acquittal is the key.

[Sherman A1]

2. Even with a Senate action

he remains impeached by my understanding, but I'm not a lawyer.

[FBaggins]

6. Lawyer or not... you're correct. nt

[jberryhill]

14. Correct

[Thekaspervote]

3. Once again madam speaker owns the dotard!!

[FBaggins]

4. They haven't thought that through

Nothing keeps a successor from pardoning a former president for crimes that he has committed... Article II Section 2 just means that he can't pardon himself from the impeachment - and can't pardon other people from their's (e.g., judges).

This just means that a president can't stop or undo the Senate's ability to remove people from office. And "after he leaves office" the ability to impact an impeachment is moot... because all impeachment (and conviction of course) can do is remove him from office.

[beachbumbob]

9. not true, the clause specifies "impeachment", not being removed from office under impeachment

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.


IN CASES OF IMPEACHMENT

thats way nixon FRIGGIN RESIGNED before he was impeached

[FBaggins]

10. The point is that he can't pardon the impeachment OR a removal

Because neither is a criminal judgment.

It has nothing to do with his power to pardon crimes after he has been impeached (assuming he's still president of course)... or of the power of other presidents to pardon crimes for someone who has been impeached.

[jberryhill]

13. Look at the same phrase in Article 1

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

And then Article 2:

he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

It uses the identical phrase to refer to the limited effect of "Cases of Impeachment". The president cannot pardon others in the government - cabinet officers, judges - from impeachment itself.

That makes sense, since impeachment is an independent power of Congress, so extending the pardon to it would defeat the purpose.

[jberryhill]

12. +1

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

7. That makes no sense. Dolt45 is officially impeached as of yesterday...

so, by the clear language of Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution, he cannot be pardoned. Ford was able to pardon Nixon only because he was NOT impeached... he resigned.

But then, I'm not an attorney either, so my legal advice is worth what I'm charging you for it... zip.

[marble falls]

8. Nancy Polosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler have got this and I trust them implicitly ...

They got this!

[jberryhill]

11. I don't think so

First off, Article I, Section 1, Clause 7, defines the boundaries of impeachment:

"Judgment in Cases of Impeachment, shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

Rather than indirectly quote Art. 2, Sec. 2, Cl. 1, it says, "[H]e shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

Notice that both clauses use the identical phrase "Cases of Impeachment".

In other words, the president cannot pardon someone in a "Case of Impeachment". For example, if a federal judge or cabinet official was being impeached, the president could not issue a pardon that would prevent either the case from proceeding in the Senate, or would prevent their removal from office if convicted.

It is a restriction on the pardon power being applied to the impeachment process. It is not a restriction on pardoning someone who has been impeached of other offenses.

The notion that the House could unilaterally determine that an official could not be pardoned for an ordinary federal offense is a fairly tortured interpretation that strikes me as wishful thinking.

[Patterson]

15. I always thought the Constitution meant

no one could nullify, erase, or pardon the impeachment itself. Al Gore, elected, could not have said: "Bill Clinton, your impeachment is hereby null and void."