December 2024 and January 2025 may possibly go down in history as one of the most politically significant moments in recent history. In December then-President Joe Biden broke a record by issuing pardons or commuted sentences of more than 1,500 people. Several of his pardons were preemptive ones for family members and other politicians. Biden’s most controversial pardon was for his son Hunter, which Biden promised during the campaign that he would not do.Then, in December alone, Biden signed 13 executive orders on his way out of office. Once President Trump was inaugurated, Trump pardoned around 1,500 people who were involved in the Jan. 6 riots and signed more than 45 executive orders.Personally, I question the constitutionality of many of these executive orders; many of these should fall under the authority of Congress. I also have ethical questions about Biden’s pardons. As for the Trump ones, I do agree with some but do feel that the leaders and those who were violent or destructive should be punished for their actions.The difference between the executive orders and the pardons are that the former are constitutionally questionable while the latter, while I disagree with many of them, all fall within the scope of the president’s rights. Even more, historically speaking, Trump pardoning those accused of insurrection were not the first a president has done so. You may be surprised to see who the first president was.First, as always, the Constitution. Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 reads, “The President… shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” As I have discussed several times in this column, the Constitution can be extremely vague, and this clause has raised countless questions over the years. One question that was never answered during Trump’s first term was if selfpardoning was allowed. The Supreme Court never made a ruling on that situation as Trump did not try it. However, for many other scenarios the Court has ruled with the 1866 Ex parte Garland case probably being the most important.In that case, Congress had passed a law that forbade any member of the Confederate government to hold a court position. Augustus Hill Garland of Arkansas fit into that category but had been pardoned by President Andrew Johnson, so Garland sued on grounds that the law should not apply to him. The Court agreed with a 5-4 decision ...
