Concise Responsible Journalism
Concise Responsible Journalism
Politics
Lame duck pardons are a tool often misused to grant clemency to politically connected individuals, undermining public trust in the rule of law. During his last day in office, Donald Trump issued 74 pardons and commuted 70 sentences, including several for allies involved in serious financial crimes, raising concerns of political favoritism. This lack of accountability highlights the need for reform to ensure that presidential clemency powers are exercised transparently and not as a shield for corruption.
Lame duck pardons can serve as a critical check against prosecutorial overreach. Trump’s pardons did not shield his allies from all legal consequences; state and civil penalties still apply. Misusing pardons risks legal backlash and further scrutiny, not impunity.
Eliminating lame-duck pardons is misguided. While some misuse has occurred, these pardons serve a critical purpose in balancing the justice system. Presidents like George H.W. Bush and Obama used them to rectify injustices without political pressure. Targeting lame-duck pardons undermines the President’s constitutional authority and risks reducing clemency grants overall. Instead of elimination, reforms should focus on transparency and ethical standards, ensuring legitimate use rather than stripping away a necessary executive check on prosecutorial overreach.
Lame-duck pardons often lack accountability and transparency, allowing presidents to reward allies without consequence. Nearly 60% of Trump’s pardons occurred post-election, highlighting the risk of unchecked abuse. Eliminating them protects against last-minute corruption and restores public trust in governance.