DOJ wants life in prison for man pardoned by President Trump

Federal prosecutors are asking a judge to sentence a Jan. 6 rioter to a lifetime behind bars—despite President Donald Trump pardoning his crimes at the U.S. Capitol, reported The Daily Beast.

Edward Kelley, a 35-year-old East Tennessee native, was convicted in November of conspiring to murder FBI agents and other officials who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.

                                            Edward Kelly 'Make America Great Again'

Kelley was separately convicted of throwing a Capitol cop to the ground, with the help of others, and smashing a window with a piece of wood. However, those charges were wiped away by the president’s sweeping pardon of so-called “Jan. 6ers” in January. 

Edward Kelley was wearing a helmet, gloves, and a paint respirator when he entered the U.S. Capitol. / Department of Justice

Kelley has contested that Trump’s pardon of his Capitol crimes should also apply to his conviction for plotting to kill FBI agents and local law enforcement in Tennessee.

The Department of Justice disagrees. In a sentencing memorandum filed Tuesday, and first reported by Politico, they asked a judge to send Kelley to prison for the rest of his life.

“Kelley created a list of specific people he intended to assassinate, including agents, officers, and employees of the FBI, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Tennessee Highway Patrol, Maryville Police Department, Blount County Sheriff’s Office, and Clinton Police Department,” the memorandum read. “To effectuate his plan, Kelley sought the assistance of others to identify his victims’ pattern of life and to murder them at their offices, homes, and in public places.”

Part of his alleged plan was to attack his local FBI office in Knoxville by using “improvised explosive devices attached to vehicles and drones.”

To read more CLICK HERE

Creators: The Presidential Pardon as a Tool of Political Repression

Matthew T. Mangino
CREATORS
June 3, 2025

American presidents are empowered by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, "to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States." The clemency power can refer to multiple forms of presidential mercy:

• Pardons to forgive past crimes and restore civil rights.
• Commutations completely or partially reduce sentences for people in prison or on community supervision.
• Remissions reduce financial penalties associated with convictions.
• Respites are temporary reprieves usually granted to inmates for medical reasons.

All presidents have exercised their constitutional authority to grant mercy to those serving a sentence or relieving those of the burden of a criminal record.

According to the New York Times, "President Trump is employing the vast power of his office to redefine criminality to suit his needs — using pardons to inoculate criminals he happens to like, downplaying corruption and fraud as crimes, and seeking to stigmatize political opponents by labeling them criminals."

President Donald Trump has used his pardon power, "to assert personal dominance over processes generally, if not always, governed by established ethical and institutional guardrails." He professes to be tough-on-crime, "but has often shown a willingness to do so only when he defines the rules and the laws."

This week, he justified pardoning Scott Jenkins, the former sheriff of Culpeper County, Va., and a political ally sentenced to 10 years for bribery, saying Mr. Jenkins had been "dragged through HELL by a Corrupt and Weaponized" DOJ during the Biden administration. In fact, Mr. Jenkins was convicted after evidence showed that he had taken $75,000 in bribes in exchange for making wealthy business owners auxiliary deputy sheriffs in his department.

Trump's mercy extended to the son of a political fund-raiser who happened to be a confessed tax cheat. Then there is the donor to Trump's 2016 campaign who was convicted of campaign fiance fraud. Trump also pardoned a former Republican congressman from Staten Island who invoked Trump's name in his unsuccessful effort to defend himself against tax charges.

The list goes on, Trump pardoned a Long Island labor leader who failed to report $300,000 in gifts; Todd and Julie Chrisley, the reality TV couple known for "Chrisley Knows Best," after they were found guilty of a $36 million fraud and tax evasion; and the co-founder of Death Row Records, who, according to the Times, had endorsed Trump while serving a hefty sentence for conspiracy to commit murder.

Ed Martin, the former nominee for U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., and current Department of Justice pardon attorney, coined the phrase, "No MAGA left behind." Martin has suggested that the DOJ should investigate Trump's adversaries.

"If they can be charged, we'll charge them," Martin told The New York Times, "But if they can't be charged, we will name them. And we will name them, and in a culture that respects shame, they should be people that are ashamed."

During Trump's first term, he drew criticism for granting clemency to many people who had a "personal or political connection to the president," and he often circumvented the formal process for considering clemency requests, according to analyses by the Lawfare blog. According to The Pew Research, President Joe Biden also circumvented the process at times, including when he pardoned his son, Hunter.

Former President Bill Clinton drew bipartisan condemnation for pardoning a fugitive commodities trader, Marc Rich, on his last day in office in 2001. And Clinton, like Biden, also pardoned a family member. On the same day he pardoned Rich, he pardoned his half-brother Roger Clinton, who had been convicted of selling cocaine, reported Pew.

The most famous act of clemency in U.S. history was the pardon of a former president. On Sept. 8, 1974, in the wake of the Watergate scandal, former President Gerald Ford preemptively pardoned former President Richard Nixon for any federal crimes he "committed or may have committed."

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book The Executioner's Toll, 2010 was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino

To visit Creators CLICK HERE

Will Trump defy SCOTUS as his executive orders get overturned?

 David French writing for The New York Times:

Let’s briefly make our way through Trump’s birthright citizenship order. It’s extraordinarily broad. It doesn’t just block citizenship for children of illegal immigrants, it also blocks citizenship for children whose parents are legally present in the United States if they don’t have permanent status when their child is born.

This contradicts the language of the 14th Amendment, a controlling federal statute and Supreme Court precedent. The 14th Amendment says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Children of illegal immigrants are quite plainly subject to American jurisdiction. They’re bound by American law every moment they’re on American soil. As Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown, explained in an excellent and comprehensive Substack post, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was meant to exclude children of diplomats, children of Native Americans who were subject to tribal sovereignty, and “children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation.”

These principles were outlined in an 1898 Supreme Court case called United States v. Wong Kim Ark. But one doesn’t have to rely entirely on a precedent more than a century old. As Vladeck points out, in a 1982 case called Plyler v. Doe, the court held that “no plausible distinction with respect to 14th Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.”

Three years later, in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda, the court observed that the undocumented immigrant parents in the case “had given birth to a child, who, born in the United States, was a citizen of the country.”

Trump may try to claim in court that undocumented immigrants are an invading, occupying force. Indeed, one of the executive orders he signed after taking office asserted that America is facing an “invasion” at the hands of migrants on its borders. Can he deem them hostile occupiers and deny their children citizenship?

No. As James Madison said in The Report of 1800, the term “invasion” applies to an “operation of war.” Any other reading of the term reaches an absurd and dangerous result. If economic migrants are “invaders,” can they be targeted with drone strikes? Gunned down at the border by the 82nd Airborne Division? Can we suspend habeas corpus to stop immigrants? Obviously not. Several federal courts of appeal have reached the same, sensible conclusion. Illegal immigration is not an invasion.

I can undertake a similar legal analysis of many of Trump’s executive orders (though not all are legally deficient). Trump’s order purporting to block enforcement of the law banning TikTok is almost comically illegal. It contradicts the plain language of the statute, and presidents do not have the constitutional power to rewrite statutes by executive fiat.

But this legal analysis skips a key question: Will Trump comply with the rulings of the Supreme Court? Or will he disregard rulings he doesn’t like, demand that the executive branch bend to his will, and then pardon the men and women who might criminally defy the Supreme Court?

If you think this scenario is far-fetched — yet another example of “pearl clutching” by hysterical Never Trumpers — remember that in 2021 JD Vance said in a podcast, “I think that what Trump should do, like if I was giving him one piece of advice, fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people. And when the courts — because you will get taken to court — and then when the courts stop you, stand before the country, like Andrew Jackson did, and say: ‘The chief justice has made his ruling, now let him enforce it.’”

Jackson’s statement is probably apocryphal. His own response to the Supreme Court was far more complex than the quote implies, but Vance’s intent is obvious. He was signaling that Trump could defy the nation’s highest court.

Vance stood by that idea in 2024, and now — in 2025 — Trump has fundamentally rebuked the American justice system by ordering the pardon and release of more than 1,500 people lawfully charged for their role in arguably the most dangerous insurrectionary act since the Civil War.

I continue to hope that Trump will begin to behave as he did before he attempted to steal the 2020 election. As The Times’s Adam Liptak reported in 2023, “the Trump administration had the worst Supreme Court record of any since at least the Roosevelt administration.” Yet Trump did not defy the court. Time and again, he lost and then complied with the rulings.

But 2020 was different. He lost every important court case challenging the outcome of the election, yet rather than yield to the rule of law (as Al Gore did when he faced a bitter Supreme Court defeat in 2000), he lied to the American public, tried to illegally cling to power and instigated a mob.

Trump’s pardons tell us that we’re far more likely to experience the President Trump of 2020 (and especially 2021) than the President Trump of 2017 to 2019. As National Review’s Noah Rothman argues, Trump is already planting the seeds of more political violence.

“Republicans who support these pardons,” Rothman writes, “will sacrifice the moral authority they would have needed if they were to convincingly argue for the preservation of domestic tranquillity.”

Rothman is right. Trump’s friends can commit acts of violence on his behalf. Trump’s enemies have to face danger on their own. And that reality hovers over every presidential decision Trump makes.

To read more CLCIK HERE

Trump, as promised, pardons Jan. 6 insurrectionist

 US President Donald Trump issued pardons Monday to around 1,500 people convicted for their roles in the January 6th, 2021 Capitol attack, where rioters stormed the legislative building seeking to disrupt the certification of the 2021 election. Alongside the full pardons, Trump commuted the sentences of 14 other January 6th defendants, including Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes, who will be released but retain their convictions. Trump also directed the Justice Department to drop outstanding charges against all other Capitol attack defendants.

While signing the pardons, Trump referred to the defendants as “hostages” and said that his administration is doing “further research” on those who have had their sentences commuted.

Among those who have received full pardons is Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, whose mother announced his release on social media. Tarrio was convicted of seditious conspiracy and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding in 2023. Prosecutors said Tarrio directed and encouraged the actions of Proud Boy Capitol rioters despite not being present in Washington DC at the time.

To read more CLICK HERE

Creators: Rewriting History on the Anniversary of the Jan. 6 Insurrection

Matthew T. Mangino
Creators
January 6, 2025

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) recently released his "Interim Report on the Failures and Politicization of the January 6th Select Committee." As the title suggests, the report seeks to rewrite what happened on Jan. 6, 2021, when insurrectionists, encouraged by then-President and current President-elect Donald Trump, attacked the U.S. Capitol.

It seems fitting that Loudermilk should be from the state of Georgia. He wants to do to Jan. 6 what his Southern forefathers did in the decades following the Civil War. He wants to rewrite history.

The South was vanquished after the Civil War. The Confederates could not deal with massive and total defeat. As Ty Seidule wrote in "Robert E. Lee and Me," a new narrative had to be created to explain their failure. Seidule explained, "Today, historians call the series of lies, half-truths, and exaggerations the 'Lost Cause of the Confederacy' myth."

Loudermilk's report includes lies, half-truths, exaggerations and omissions. As historian and writer Heather Cox Richardson recently wrote, quoting former Rep. Liz Cheney, Loudermilk's report "intentionally disregards the truth and the Select Committee's tremendous weight of evidence, and instead fabricates lies and defamatory allegations in an attempt to cover up what Donald Trump did." Cheney continued, "Their allegations do not reflect a review of the actual evidence, and are a malicious and cowardly assault on the truth."

The Lost Cause was not just a passing effort to rewrite history. Seventy-one years after the war, Loudermilk's fellow Georgian Margaret Mitchell wrote "Gone with the Wind," a playbook for the Lost Cause. Made into an Academy Award-winning movie, "Gone with the Wind" sanitized the reasons for the war, shaping perceptions of the Civil War for generations.

The FBI classified the Jan. 6 attack as an act of domestic terrorism that injured approximately 140 police officers and endangered the country's peaceful transfer of power. According to NPR, in the immediate aftermath, a bipartisan group of political leaders condemned the violence. "American citizens attacked their own government. They used terrorism to try to stop a specific piece of domestic business they did not like, "said Sen. Mitch McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate at the time.

The attempted coup was not a spontaneous act, according to American Oversight. "The invasion of the U.S. Capitol ... was stoked in plain sight." ProPublica reported that Trump supporters had discussed openly for weeks their plans for a violent overthrow. Their goal of stopping the election certification was based on unfounded conspiracy theories of widespread voter fraud.

Trump has rejected those arguments and is complicit in attempting to rewrite the history of the insurrection. He refers to Jan. 6 as a "day of love" and calls the rioters "patriots." He announced his intention to pardon those charged and convicted in connection with the attack — that will be a lot of pardons.

Nearly 1,000 Jan. 6 offenders pleaded guilty; more than 250 were convicted in court. The historical record established by the vast, nationwide legal effort cannot just be erased by a wholesale pardon. The endless video clips — logged and verified — and the volumes of court records have helped prosecutors turn Jan. 6 into the best-documented riot in history.

Seidule wrote, "[T]he Lost Cause became a movement, an ideology, a myth, even a civil religion." He went on to write, "This lie came at a horrible, deadly, impossible cost to the nation, a cost we are still paying today. The Lost Cause created a flawed memory of the Civil War, a lie that formed the ideological foundation for white supremacy and Jim Crow laws."

Loudermilk seeks to do the same with Jan. 6. As America marks the fourth anniversary of Jan. 6, we would do well to remember that Loudermilk's flawed and misleading report and demand that Liz Cheney be prosecuted for her work on the investigating committee is ripped from the playbook of the postbellum South.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book "The Executioner's Toll, 2010" was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on X @MatthewTMangino

To visit Creators CLICK HERE

Creators: Will Biden's Commutation Further Chill Clemency in Pennsylvania?

Matthew T. Mangino
Creators Syndicate
December 17, 2024

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro recently pointed out that "Governors and presidents have unique power to grant pardons and clemency and commute sentences. It is an absolute power, and it is a power that should be used incredibly carefully."

Recently, President Joe Biden granted clemency to nearly 1,500 Americans — the most ever in a single day, according to the White House. Biden was convinced these men and women had shown a successful record of rehabilitation and a strong commitment to making their communities safer.

The president commuted the sentences of individuals who were placed on home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic and who have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities. He also pardoned 39 individuals who were convicted of nonviolent crimes.

Biden's decision to commute the 17-year prison sentence of Michael Conahan has become a flash point in northeastern Pennsylvania. Biden has always talked with affection about his upbringing in Scranton, Pennsylvania. However, his decision to commute Conahan's sentence has ruffled feathers in his old hometown and beyond.

In what became known as the "kids-for-cash" scandal, Conahan and Judge Mark Ciavarella shut down a county-run juvenile detention center and accepted $2.8 million in illegal payments from a friend of Conahan's who built and co-owned two for-profit detention centers.

Ciavarella, who presided over juvenile court, pushed a zero-tolerance policy that guaranteed large numbers of children would fill the beds of the private centers. The scandal prompted the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to throw out about 4,000 juvenile convictions involving more than 2,300 children.

The people of Pennsylvania have had a complicated and politically distorted view of clemency.

In Pennsylvania, the governor's clemency authority, derived by Article IV, Section 9 of the state constitution, is limited by the Board of Pardons. The board is comprised of the lieutenant governor, attorney general and three members appointed by the governor. Traditionally, if a majority of the board were to vote in favor of an application, the board recommends favorable action to the governor. If less than a majority of the board vote in favor, the result was a denial by the board and the application was not forwarded to the governor.

In the 1970s, mercy toward those serving life in prison flourished. Democratic Gov. Milton Shapp commuted 251 life sentences.

Today, clemency for a life or death sentence requires a unanimous vote of the board. The change came in 1996 with the election of Gov. Tom Ridge. During the campaign, Ridge attacked his opponent, Lt. Gov. Mark Singel, for recommending, as a member of the Board of Pardons, a pardon for Reginald McFadden. Once released, McFadden committed another murder.

As a result of McFadden, pardons for serious crimes slowed to less than a trickle in Pennsylvania. Ridge, who won, in part, on the back of McFadden, never pardoned an inmate serving a life sentence. Ridge's Lt. Gov. Mark Schweiker, who took over after Ridge became the first secretary of Homeland Security, pardoned one lifer. Ed Rendell, a Democrat, pardoned five lifers in eight years, and his successor GOP Tom Corbett commuted zero.

Shapiro, Pennsylvania's current governor, said Biden "got it absolutely wrong" when he commuted Conahan's sentence.

Shapiro said, "I study every single case that comes across my desk where there's a request for a pardon or clemency or a reduction of sentence, and I take it very seriously. I weigh the merits of the case. I weigh what occurred in the court proceedings. I think about public safety and victims and all of those issues factor into my decision."

Shapiro's predecessor, Democrat Tom Wolfe, pardon 53 lifers between 2015 and 2023 — a meager few when compared to Shapp in the 1970s, but a substantial improvement, nonetheless.

There are many men and women worthy of mercy. Will Biden's clemency for Conahan have a chilling effect on commutations in Pennsylvania the same way Reginald McFadden nearly extinguished clemency for inmates facing life in prison?

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book "The Executioner's Toll, 2010" was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on X @MatthewTMangino.

To visit Creators CLICK HERE

President Biden pardons 39 and grants clemency to nearly 1,500

 President Biden announced pardons for 39 people and commuted the sentences of nearly 1,500 others, setting a new daily record for clemency with a focus on those who were under home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic, reported The Hill.

The sweeping act of clemency came as Biden has been under pressure to pardon individuals after he granted one for his son, Hunter. The president in a statement said he would take more steps in the weeks ahead before he leaves office.

“America was built on the promise of possibility and second chances,” Biden said in a statement. “As President, I have the great privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities, and taking steps to remove sentencing disparities for non-violent offenders, especially those convicted of drug offenses.”

The White House said it was the largest act of clemency in a single day in modern history.

Biden announced pardons for 39 individuals who he said had successfully rehabilitated their lives and contributed to their communities. They were each convicted of non-violent crimes, the White House said, and included a military veteran, a nurse who led natural disaster responses and an addiction counselor.

The roughly 1,500 individuals who had their sentences commuted had been under home confinement for at least a year under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, a law passed in 2020 during the pandemic that allowed for extended home confinement for certain prisoners when COVID-19 was rampant. The Associated Press reported that at one point, one-in-five prisoners had the virus.

“These commutation recipients, who were placed on home confinement during the COVID pandemic, have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities and have shown that they deserve a second chance,” Biden said in a statement.

Prior to Thursday’s announcement, Biden had issued 122 commutations and 21 pardons, and he offered sweeping clemency to those convicted of marijuana use on federal lands.

He has faced growing pressure in his final weeks in office to use his presidential pardon powers, with advocates ramping up their efforts after Biden’s controversial decision to pardon his son.

The president had for months insisted he would not pardon Hunter Biden, who was convicted on gun charges and pleaded guilty to federal tax charges earlier this year. But he reversed course earlier this month, arguing that his son’s cases had been influenced by politics.

Some Democrats have suggested Biden should preemptively pardon individuals who might be targeted by the incoming Trump administration, such as members of the House panel that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Others have called for him to grant clemency to those on death row.

“I will take more steps in the weeks ahead,” Biden said Thursday. “My Administration will continue reviewing clemency petitions to advance equal justice under the law, promote public safety, support rehabilitation and reentry, and provide meaningful second chances.”

To read more CLICK HERE

 

Texas set to execute man in the face of enormous opposition due to conviction by shaken-baby syndrome

As Texas prison officials ready the death chamber to execute Robert Roberson tonight, a thundering chorus of people who believe the state is about to kill an innocent man hope last-minute measures will buy him more time, reported The Texas Tribune.

Roberson was convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter, who was diagnosed with shaken baby syndrome. But experts, lawmakers and the lead detective in the girl’s case say the science supporting Roberson’s death sentence no longer holds up — and the state’s “junk science” law should have already halted his execution.

In an stunning move, a Texas House committee voted unanimously Wednesday to subpoena Roberson ahead of his Thursday execution, a step that sought to give the man a final lifeline after a series of court rejections left him on track to become the first person in the country executed for allegedly shaking a baby to death.

That move “sets up a bit of a separation of powers issue that I think would result in him not being executed tomorrow night,” Benjamin Wolff, director of the Texas Office of Capital and Forensic Writs, said on Wednesday, adding that he had not seen this maneuver attempted before, so it was not clear what could happen. “It’s an unprecedented subpoena and an unprecedented case.”

But Roberson set to be executed around 6p.m. Thursday, it’s unclear if that gambit will work.

The Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee approved the subpoena hours after the state’s highest criminal court again declined to stop the execution, and after the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole denied Roberson’s request for clemency. Gov. Greg Abbott cannot defy the board’s recommendation, but he can issue a 30-day reprieve. Abbott has remained silent. Roberson’s lawyers have also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in.

The committee’s subpoena — which was offered by state Reps. Brian Harrison, R-Midlothian, and Jeff Leach, R-Plano — calls for Roberson to "provide all relevant testimony and information concerning the committee's inquiry."

Gretchen Sween, Roberson's attorney, said that she had "no knowledge" of a subpoena being used before in an effort to pump the brakes on an execution.

"It shows how strongly the lawmakers who have learned about this case feel about the injustice," she said.

The parole board’s six members voted unanimously earlier Wednesday to deny Roberson's clemency application. The decision came amid a forceful bipartisan campaign to spare Roberson’s life, and as lawmakers raised concerns that the courts were not properly implementing a groundbreaking 2013 “junk science” law that was intended to provide justice to people convicted based on scientific evidence that has since changed or been debunked.

“It is not shocking that the criminal justice system failed Mr. Roberson so badly. What’s shocking is that, so far, the system has been unable to correct itself," Sween said in a statement after the board's vote. “We pray that Governor Abbott does everything in his power to prevent the tragic, irreversible mistake of executing an innocent man.”

Brian Wharton, the lead detective in Roberson’s case who sided with the prosecution at trial, has called for his exoneration, as has bestselling author John Grisham. A large majority of the Texas House has asked the courts to take a second look at his case. Doug Deason, a GOP megadonor and Abbott ally, also publicly said he believes in Roberson’s innocence, according to the Houston Chronicle.

To read more CLICK HERE

Maryland governor pardons 175,000 marijuana convictions

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore will issue a mass pardon of more than 175,000 marijuana convictions, one of the nation’s most sweeping acts of clemency involving a drug now in widespread recreational use, reported the Washington Post.

The pardons will forgive low-level marijuana possession charges for an estimated 100,000 people in what the Democratic governor said is a step to heal decades of social and economic injustice that disproportionately harms Black and Brown people. Moore noted criminal records have been used to deny housing, employment and education, holding people and their families back long after their sentences have been served.

“I’m ecstatic that we have a real opportunity with what I’m signing to right a lot of historical wrongs,” Moore said in an interview. “If you want to be able to create inclusive economic growth, it means you have to start removing these barriers that continue to disproportionately sit on communities of color.”

Moore called the scope of his pardons “the most far-reaching and aggressive” executive action among officials nationwide who have sought to unwind criminal justice inequities with the growing legalization of marijuana. Nine other states and multiple cities have pardoned hundreds of thousands of old marijuana convictions in recent years, according to the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. Legalized marijuana markets reap billions in revenue for state governments each year, and polls show public sentiment on the drug has also turned — with more people both embracing cannabis use and repudiating racial disparities exacerbated by the War on Drugs.

To read more CLICK HERE

 

Creators: When Clemency Is Not Enough

Matthew T. Mangino
Creators Syndicate
March 11, 2024

Ever hear of Philip Esformes? If you haven't, chances are you will hear about him this summer or fall.

Philip Esformes was raised in an Orthodox Jewish community outside Chicago. His father, Morris Esformes, a rabbi, business executive and well-known philanthropist, made a fortune in the nursing home industry.

Philip eventually took over the family business, expanding the health care chain in Florida. According to The Washington Post, as Esformes' wealth expanded, he bought private planes, multiple residences and exotic cars; he drove a $1.6 million Ferrari and wore a $360,000 wristwatch.

The son of a rabbi was living the high life. That all came crashing down in 2016. Esformes was charged by the United States Department of Justice as part of the largest health-care fraud scheme ever prosecuted.

At the time, prosecutors said Esformes bribed doctors to put patients into his nursing homes, where they often received inadequate care or were given unnecessary services that were then billed to Medicare and Medicaid.

Esformes personally netted more than $37 million from the yearslong scheme. According to CNBC, a federal prosecutor described Esformes as "a man driven by almost unbounded greed."

The jury convicted him of 20 criminal counts at trial, but deadlocked on six other counts. A judge sentenced Esformes to twenty years in prison.

After his incarceration, Esformes immediately sought the influence of high-ranking former government officials to seek clemency. An attorney with the Aleph Institute, a Jewish charity affiliated with the Chabad-Lubavitch movement and frequent object of the elder Esformes' charity, began lobbying the White House. Esformes' team enlisted help from Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, two former U.S. attorneys general; and Larry Thompson, a former second in command at the DOJ.

With the support of then Attorney General William Barr, the fruits of their labor paid off. Having served less than five years of a 20-year sentence, Esformes walked out of federal prison. In the waning days of Donald Trump's presidency, Trump granted him clemency.

Esformes had seemingly caught a big break. He was a free man. However, the Biden Justice Department had a different idea. The DOJ announced that it intended to retry Esformes on the six counts that the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict.

Retrying a defendant on charges in which the jury is deadlocked, commonly known as "hung," is not unusual. Retrying a defendant after a few charges are hung but a majority of charges result in convictions is unusual. Retrying a defendant on hung charges after clemency is granted is also extremely unusual.

It was Trump who left the door open to new prosecutions. Trump granted clemency, cutting short the length of the sentence, on the 20 charges Esformes was convicted of but did not grant relief on the six charges he was not convicted.

The questions surrounding the case come down to whether trying Esformes again violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution — being tried twice for the same crime.

According to The Washington Post, prosecutors argued that if Trump had wanted to make sure Esformes could not be retried on the hung counts, "he could easily have done so" by granting him a pardon or specifically referencing those counts. "He did neither," they wrote.

Although the decision to retry Esformes was universally assailed on the "right," it appears to have been accepted by his legal team.

Last month, Esformes pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and was sentenced to time served, with prosecutors agreeing to dismiss the remaining five counts.

In the meantime, the Federal Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's judgment on Esformes' original convictions and sentence, the restitution award of $5.5 million and the forfeiture judgment in the amount of $38.7 million.

It was a rather subdued conclusion to what started out as a highly charged decision by the DOJ. If this were any other year or any other time, that might be the end of the story. But this is 2024, anything is political fair game in the Trump v. Biden rematch.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book "The Executioner's Toll, 2010" was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.

To visit Creators CLICK HERE

Merry Christmas! President Biden pardons thousands for possession of marijuana

President Joe Biden pardoned thousands of people who were convicted of use and simple possession of marijuana on federal lands and in the District of Columbia, the White House said, in his latest round of executive clemencies meant to rectify racial disparities in the justice system, reported The Associated Press.

The categorical pardon builds on a similar round issued just before the 2022 midterm elections that pardoned thousands convicted of simple possession on federal lands eligible. Friday’s action broadens the criminal offenses covered by the pardon. Biden is also granting clemency to 11 people serving what the White House called “disproportionately long” sentences for nonviolent drug offenses.

Biden, in a statement, said his actions would help make the “promise of equal justice a reality.”

“Criminal records for marijuana use and possession have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities,” Biden said. “Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana. It’s time that we right these wrongs.”

To read more CLICK HERE

Biden slow to commute sentences, just topped 100 last month

President Joe Biden has commuted the sentences of 31 people convicted of nonviolent drug crimes who were serving time in home confinement, the White House announced, as reported by The Associated Press.

Many would have gotten a lower sentence if they were charged today with the same offense because of changes in the laws. A commuted sentence means they’ll spend less time in home confinement.

The commutations came as the White House announced a set of policy actions across 20 different agencies meant to improve the criminal justice system, which disproportionately affects Black and other non-white communities. The president announced his reelection campaign this week, and must keep Black voters in his coalition if he wants to win in 2024.

The plan is an effort to expand health care access, affordable housing and education, and make it easier for those who have been mixed up in the system to get jobs, higher education and vote. The effort includes a plan to make more grants available for people who need funding for education, and small business loans.

Those whose sentences were commuted included men and women convicted of drug possession in Iowa, Indiana, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii and Texas, and they will all finish serving time June 30. If any are in prison, they will finish out their terms in home confinement, and won’t have to pay the rest of their fines which range from $5,000 to $20,000.

Roughly 600,000 U.S. residents leave prison each year, and another 9 million cycle in and out of jail. As many as one in three Americans has a criminal record. That stigma can make it hard to get a job, go back to school or start a business.

“Far too many of them face steep barriers to getting a job or a home, obtaining health care, or finding the capital to start a business,” said outgoing domestic policy adviser Susan Rice, the first person to hold both national security and domestic policy adviser positions in the White House. She is leaving her post after two years and her last day is May 26.

“By investing in crime prevention and a fairer criminal justice system, we can tackle the root causes of crime, improve individual and community outcomes, and ease the burden on police,” she said.

The Democratic president has commuted the sentences of 75 other people so far. He also pardoned thousands who were convicted of “simple possession” of marijuana under federal law, and others who have long since served out their sentences.

To read more CLICK HERE

 

PA Gov. Wolf pardons Rapper Meek Mill while becoming the most prolific granter of pardons in the state's history

 Departing Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf has pardoned Rapper Meek Mill. The rapper announced the pardon of his conviction on firearms and drug charges on social media, reported CNN.

On Instagram, he posted the official pardon document. In the caption, the Philadelphia native thanked his fans. “I’m only gone do more for my community on god,” he wrote.

Meek Mill was one of 369 Pennsylvanians pardoned by the governor this week, a representative of the governor told CNN over email. The pardons granted in the past week raise Wolf’s total pardons to 2,540, the most ever granted by a Pennsylvania governor, according to a Thursday news release from the governor’s office.

An official pardon means “total forgiveness by the state for a criminal conviction” and allows a person to completely clear their criminal record, says the release.

“I have taken this process very seriously — reviewing and giving careful thought to each and every one of these 2,540 pardons and the lives they will impact,” said Wolf in the news release. “Every single one of the Pennsylvanians who made it through the process truly deserves their second chance, and it’s been my honor to grant it.”

Meek Mill was originally convicted in 2008 and sentenced to probation. In 2018, he received a two-to-four year prison sentence for violating his probation, which sparked the viral #FreeMeekMill movement and triggered an outcry from criminal justice activists.

Since then, Meek Mill has become a vocal advocate for criminal justice reform, launching an organization called the REFORM Alliance in 2019. The organization “aims to transform probation and parole by changing laws, systems and culture to create real pathways to work and wellbeing” according to its website.

To read more CLICK HERE

 

Biden pardons six people while vacationing in St. Croix

 President Joe Biden has pardoned six people who have served out sentences after convictions on a murder charge and drug- and alcohol-related crimes, including an 80-year-old woman convicted of killing her abusive husband about a half-century ago and a man who pleaded guilty to using a telephone for a cocaine transaction in the 1970s, reported The Associated Press.

The pardons, announced Friday, mean the criminal record of the crimes is now purged. They come a few months after the Democratic president pardoned thousands of people convicted of “simple possession” of marijuana under federal law. He also pardoned three people earlier this year and has commuted the sentences of 75 others.

Biden’s stance on low-level crimes, particularly low-level drug possession, and how those crimes can impact families and communities for decades to come has evolved over his 50 years in public service. In the 1990s, he supported crime legislation that increased arrest and incarceration rates for drug crimes, particularly for Black and Latino people. Biden has said people are right to question his stance on the bill, but he also has encouraged them to look at what he’s doing now on crime.

The pardons were announced while the president was spending time with his family on St. Croix, in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The White House said those pardoned are people who went on to serve their communities. It said the pardons reflect Biden’s view people deserve a second chance.

To read more CLICK HERE

Biden pardons thousands of 'simple possession' of marijuana

President Joe Biden is pardoning thousands of Americans convicted of “simple possession” of marijuana under federal law, as his administration takes a dramatic step toward decriminalizing the drug and addressing charging practices that disproportionately impact people of color, reported The Associated Press.

Biden’s move also covers thousands convicted of the crime in the District of Columbia. He is also calling on governors to issue similar pardons for those convicted of state marijuana offenses, which reflect the vast majority of marijuana possession cases.

Biden, in a statement, said the move reflects his position that “no one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana.”

“Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana,” he added. “It’s time that we right these wrongs.”

According to the White House, no one is currently in federal prison solely for “simple possession” of the drug, but the pardon could help thousands overcome obstacles to renting a home or finding a job.

 “There are thousands of people who have prior Federal convictions for marijuana possession, who may be denied employment, housing, or educational opportunities as a result,” he said. “My action will help relieve the collateral consequences arising from these convictions.”

To read more CLICK HERE

Oregon governor has granted more clemency than all predecessors combined over last 50 years

Last October, Kate Brown, the governor of Oregon, signed an executive order granting clemency to 73 people who had committed crimes as juveniles, clearing a path for them to apply for parole, reported The Guardian.

The move marked the high point in a remarkable arc: as Brown approaches the end of her second term in January, she has granted commutations or pardons to 1,147 people – more than all of Oregon’s governors from the last 50 years combined.

The story of clemency in Oregon is one of major societal developments colliding: the pressure the Covid-19 pandemic put on the prison system and growing momentum for criminal justice reform.

It’s also a story of a governor’s personal convictions and how she came to embrace clemency as a tool for criminal justice reform and as an act of grace, exercising the belief that compassionate mercy and ensuring public safety are not mutually exclusive.

“If you are confident that you can keep people safe, you’ve given victims the opportunity to have their voices heard and made sure their concerns are addressed, and individuals have gone through an extensive amount of rehabilitation and shown accountability, what is the point of continuing to incarcerate someone, other than retribution?” Brown said in a June interview.

When Brown, a Democrat, became governor in Oregon in 2015, she received the power of executive clemency – an umbrella term referring to the ability of American governors and the president to grant mercy to criminal defendants. Clemency includes pardons, which fully forgive someone who has committed a crime; commutations, which change prison sentences, often resulting in early release; reprieves, which pause punishment; and eliminating court-related fines and fees.

During the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, Brown was one of 18 governors across the US who used clemency to quickly reduce prison populations in the hopes of curbing virus transmission.

She approved the early release of 963 people who had committed nonviolent crimes and met six additional criteria – not enough, according to estimates by the state’s department of corrections, to enable physical distancing, and far less than California, which released about 5,300 people, and New Jersey, which released 40% of its prison population.

But Brown’s clemency acts stand out in other ways. Brown removed one year from the sentences of 41 prisoners who worked as firefighters during the 2020 wildfire season, the most destructive in Oregon history. 

She has pardoned 63 people. Most notably, she has commuted the sentences of 144 people convicted of crimes as serious as murder, yet have demonstrated “extraordinary evidence of rehabilitation”.

Democratic and Republican governors in North Carolina, Louisiana, Missouri, Kansas and Ohio have granted clemency for similar reasons. Yet Brown’s numbers are among the highest in the US, and the impact of her decisions are profound: Oregon’s prison population declined for the first time since the passage of the state’s Measure 11 mandatory minimum sentencing law in 1994.

Measure 11 codified mandatory sentences for 16 violent crimes, required juveniles over the age of 15 charged with those crimes to be tried as adults, and ended earned time. Since its passage, Oregon’s prison population tripled to nearly 15,000 people and three new prisons were built.

Brown also stands out for who she grants clemency to. Forty per cent of Brown’s commutations are Black, in response to Black Oregonians being incarcerated at a rate five times higher than their share of the state’s population. Nearly two dozen other clemency recipients were convicted as juveniles. Many were sentenced to life without parole and other lengthy sentences.

To read more CLICK HERE

 

Missouri governor pardons couple convicted of pointing guns at protesters

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson announced that he made good on his promise to pardon a couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators as they marched past the couple’s home in a luxury St. Louis enclave last year, reported The Associated Press.

Parson, a Republican, on Friday pardoned Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750, and Patricia McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000.

“Mark McCloskey has publicly stated that if he were involved in the same situation, he would have the exact same conduct,” the McCloskeys’ lawyer Joel Schwartz said Tuesday. “He believes that the pardon vindicates that conduct.”

The McCloskeys, both lawyers in their 60s, said they felt threatened by the protesters, who were passing their home in June 2020 on their way to demonstrate in front of the mayor’s house nearby in one of hundreds of similar demonstrations around the country after George Floyd’s death. The couple also said the group was trespassing on a private street.

Mark McCloskey emerged from his home with an AR-15-style rifle, and Patricia McCloskey waved a semiautomatic pistol, according to the indictment. Photos and cellphone video captured the confrontation, which drew widespread attention and made the couple heroes to some and villains to others. No shots were fired, and no one was hurt.

Special prosecutor Richard Callahan said his investigation determined that the protesters were peaceful.

“There was no evidence that any of them had a weapon and no one I interviewed realized they had ventured onto a private enclave,” Callahan said in a news release after the McCloskeys pleaded guilty.

Several Republican leaders — including then-President Donald Trump — spoke out in defense of the McCloskeys’ actions. The couple spoke on video at last year’s Republican National Convention.

Mark McCloskey, who announced in May that he was running for a U.S. Senate seat in Missouri, was unapologetic after the plea hearing.

“I’d do it again,” he said from the courthouse steps in downtown St. Louis. “Any time the mob approaches me, I’ll do what I can to put them in imminent threat of physical injury because that’s what kept them from destroying my house and my family.”

To read more CLICK HERE

 

Gov. Wolf signs off on 310 pardons

Gov. Tom Wolf has signed off on 310 pardons, 69 of them impacting the lives of nonviolent marijuana offenders, whom criminal justice advocates say face a lifetime of repercussions for an offense that's now treated no more seriously than a traffic ticket in some jurisdictions across the state, according to the Pennsylvania Capital-Star.

Wolf signed the pardons last week, his office said in a statement. The marijuana offenders were included in a new state program, started in 2019, under the auspices of Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, who chairs the state Board of Pardons, and who has been an outspoken advocate of cannabis legalization. The program speeds up the lengthy pardons process for people with nonviolent convictions for marijuana possession or paraphernalia charges.

"These pardons will give these 310 people a chance to put the conviction behind them, offering them more opportunities as they build careers, buy homes, and move on with their lives free of this burden,” Wolf said in a statement released by his office. “In particular, the nonviolent marijuana convictions-associated pardons have been expedited to make what was a years-long process now a matter of months.”

In all, Wolf has signed 95 pardons related to the expedited marijuana conviction review program, his office said in a statement.

To read more CLICK HERE

MCN: Trump’s pardons reveal extraordinary abuse of power

Matthew T. Mangino
More Content Now
December 24, 2020

The worst fears of the framers of the U.S. Constitution have come to realization 233 years after the document was drafted, debated, revised and submitted for ratification. President Donald Trump, in an attempt to shield himself from potential prosecution, just pardoned Paul Manafort and Roger Stone. He pardoned Michael Flynn on Nov. 25.

Stone was convicted last year of making false statements, obstruction and witness tampering as revealed in the Mueller investigation. The Justice Department initially recommended a 7- to 9-year sentence, but reduced the recommendation after the attorney general intervened.

Manafort was convicted of eight felonies in Virginia in 2018 and entered into a plea agreement in a separate case to 10 charges, including three counts of failing to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts, and seven counts of bank fraud and bank fraud conspiracy.

Flynn admitted to twice lying under oath. He pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to FBI investigators about his communications with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak before Trump took office.

The drafters of the Constitution were concerned that a president could use his pardon powers to protect himself or maybe worse, set in motion illegal conduct by subordinates with the promise of a pardon.

Paul Rosenzweig, a prosecutor during the Clinton Whitewater investigation, wrote in The Atlantic that during the Constitutional Convention the president’s pardon power was hotly contested. George Mason from Virginia was strongly opposed to granting the president such an imperial power. Mason worried that the president “ought not to have the power of pardoning, because he may frequently pardon crimes which were advised by himself. It may happen, at some future day, that he will establish a monarchy, and destroy the republic.”

Erick Trickey of Boston University wrote in The Atlantic that special counsel Robert Mueller wrote about the possibility of Trump pardoning Manafort and Flynn.

“Evidence concerning the President’s conduct towards Manafort indicates that the President intended to encourage Manafort to not cooperate with the government,” the report states. “The evidence supports the inference that the President intended Manafort to believe that he could receive a pardon,” Mueller adds, “which would make cooperation with the government as a means of obtaining a lesser sentence unnecessary.”

Trickey continued that the Constitution doesn’t allow the president to abuse his pardon power. Mueller’s continued, “Congress has the authority to prohibit the corrupt use of anything of value to influence the testimony of another person which would include the offer or promise of a pardon to induce a person to testify falsely or not to testify at all.”

James Pfiffner, a professor at - ironically - George Mason University, wrote in The Hill that Mueller believed the president dangled pardons over the heads of Manafort and Flynn “intend(ing) to shape their conduct in the future and encourage them to provide false testimony or otherwise obstruct justice.”

Mason is also known for a key addition to the impeachment provision of the Constitution. Trickey wrote in The Smithsonian, that Mason asked his fellow delegates why treason and bribery were the only grounds in the draft Constitution for impeaching the president? Treason, he warned, wouldn’t include “attempts to subvert the Constitution.”

After a heated exchange with fellow Virginian James Madison, Mason came up with another category of impeachable offenses: “other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The very grounds used to impeach Donald Trump.

Trump’s impeachment did not result in his removal from office. A second attempt at impeachment is impossible with less than four weeks remaining in his term. That leaves the only limits on his power, public scorn and his legacy - neither of which Trump seems to care anything about.

Ken Gormley, a Constitutional scholar and President of Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, recently wrote in the Washington Post, “If President Trump makes the ill-advised decision to try to pardon himself ... incoming president Joe Biden should respond with another unprecedented step: He should ‘un-pardon’ his predecessor.”

I would take it one step further - if the pardons of Stone, Manafort and Flynn were provided to obstruct justice, in other words to protect Trump from criminal liability “un-pardon” them as well.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter at @MatthewTMangino.

To visit the column CLICK HERE

MCN: Sure the president can pardon himself, does it matter?

Matthew T. Mangino
More Content Now
December 4, 2020

President Donald Trump tweeted, “I have the absolute right to PARDON myself.” Can the president grant himself a pardon? Yes. Will it ensure that he does not go to jail? No.

Pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, the “Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States” is vested in the president. In the nearly four years that Trump has been in office he has granted 27 pardons and 11 commutations.

Whether Trump can pardon himself is an unresolved legal question. No president has ever tried to pardon himself. As a result no federal court, including the United States Supreme Court, has directly addressed the question.

However, in 1866, the U.S Supreme Court did say, “The Constitution gives him (the president) unlimited power in respect to pardon, save only in cases of impeachment. The Constitution does not say what sort of pardon; but the term being generic necessarily includes every species of pardon, individual as well as general, conditional as well as absolute.”

Supporters of the idea that the president can pardon himself emphasize the lack of constitutional language limiting the president’s authority. Robert Nida and Rebecca L. Spiro wrote in the Oklahoma Law Review following President Bill Clinton’s impeachment, “A textual interpretation of the Pardon Clause provides the strongest argument that a self-pardon is not prohibited by the Constitution.”

Some legal experts have said a self-pardon would be unconstitutional because it violates the basic principle that nobody should be the judge in his or her own case. Consider a trial judge being accused of a crime and then presiding over her own trial. As ridiculous as that sounds, it may be fundamentally more fair than a president pardoning himself. At least, the state has a chance of convicting the judge/defendant by convincing a jury of her guilt.

In August 1974, four days before President Richard Nixon resigned, Mary C. Lawton, then the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, issued a legal opinion stating that “it would seem” that he (Nixon) could not pardon himself “under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case.”

Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor, Richard Painter, a White House lawyer under President George W. Bush and Norman Eisen, a White House lawyer under President Barack Obama all agreed with Attorney Lawton.

The three of them wrote in the Washington Post in 2017, “The Constitution specifically bars the president from using the pardon power to prevent his own impeachment or removal.” They continued, “It adds that any official removed through impeachment remains fully subject to criminal prosecution. That provision makes no sense if the president could pardon himself.”

If Trump grants himself a pardon, he may still be in jeopardy of criminal prosecution. Initially a self-pardon, if proper, will only insulate him from federal prosecution. Trump faces two New York state inquiries into whether he misled tax authorities, banks or business partners. Trump cannot shield himself from state prosecution.

He could also face federal criminal prosecution. The self-pardon is untested. The only way to test it is to arrest Trump, if there is a basis to do so, after he leaves office. Trump can raise his self-pardon as a defense to the prosecution. That challenge will come pretrial, after his indictment, initial appearance, perp-walk, mug-shot, fingerprinting and arraignment.

If the charges against the president are dismissed look for an appeal by the Department of Justice. If the charges are not dismissed a very public trial takes place and then, most assuredly, and appeal if Trump is convicted.

A self-pardon by President Trump will be a winding, time-consuming and expensive process that may ultimately make new law.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter at @MatthewTMangino

To visit the Column CLICK HERE