Can a person refuse a presidential pardon?
Michael Cohen has stated he would not accept a presidential pardon. Is this an option he has? If a pardon nullifies a committed crime, it seems like he should not be allowed to choose if he goes to prison or not because as far as the federal government is concerned, the crime is forgiven. An average person could not go to prison if a jury found them innocent. Why is this different?
united-states president pardon
add a comment |
Michael Cohen has stated he would not accept a presidential pardon. Is this an option he has? If a pardon nullifies a committed crime, it seems like he should not be allowed to choose if he goes to prison or not because as far as the federal government is concerned, the crime is forgiven. An average person could not go to prison if a jury found them innocent. Why is this different?
united-states president pardon
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago
add a comment |
Michael Cohen has stated he would not accept a presidential pardon. Is this an option he has? If a pardon nullifies a committed crime, it seems like he should not be allowed to choose if he goes to prison or not because as far as the federal government is concerned, the crime is forgiven. An average person could not go to prison if a jury found them innocent. Why is this different?
united-states president pardon
Michael Cohen has stated he would not accept a presidential pardon. Is this an option he has? If a pardon nullifies a committed crime, it seems like he should not be allowed to choose if he goes to prison or not because as far as the federal government is concerned, the crime is forgiven. An average person could not go to prison if a jury found them innocent. Why is this different?
united-states president pardon
united-states president pardon
edited 3 hours ago
JJJ
4,56322144
4,56322144
asked 5 hours ago
spmoosespmoose
1,1652617
1,1652617
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago
add a comment |
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It is possible to reject a pardon. Referring to United States v. Wilson:
There is nothing peculiar in a pardon which ought to distinguish it in
this respect from other facts; no legal principle known to the court
will sustain such a distinction. A pardon is a deed to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is
tendered, and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a
court to force it on him.
There are also other practical effects to accepting pardons, such as waiving of fifth amendment rights relating to the pardoned crimes, since it would be impossible to self incriminate anymore. So there are reasons to refuse beyond "choosing to go to prison".
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
add a comment |
The question is theoretical. But there's no need to theorize. There's at least one case of a convict successfully rejecting a presidential pardon. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in 1833, saying a pardon is "not completed without acceptance".
This case is touched upon in a previous answer to this post.
Here are excerpts from an article describing the case:
The Man Who Refused A
Pardon ~ CBMC
International
In 1829 two men, George Wilson and James Porter, robbed a United
States mail carrier. Both were subsequently captured and tried in a
court of law.
In May 1830 both men were found guilty of six charges, including
robbery of the mail "and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy."
Both Wilson and Porter received their sentences: Execution by hanging,
to be carried out on July 2.
Porter was executed on schedule, but Wilson was not.
Influential friends pleaded for mercy to the President of the United
States, Andrew Jackson, on his behalf. President Jackson issued a
formal pardon, dropping all charges. Wilson would have to serve only a
prison term of 20 years for his other crimes.
Incredibly, George Wilson refused the pardon!
An official report stated Wilson chose to "waive and decline any
advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the
pardon…."
The U.S. Supreme Court determined, "The court cannot give the prisoner
the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it... It is
a grant to him: it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he
pleases."
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "A pardon is an act of
grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws... (But) delivery is not completed without acceptance. It may
then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, and... we have
no power in a court to force it on him."
(emphasis mine)
Reference:
- United States v. Wilson, 1833
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39100%2fcan-a-person-refuse-a-presidential-pardon%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is possible to reject a pardon. Referring to United States v. Wilson:
There is nothing peculiar in a pardon which ought to distinguish it in
this respect from other facts; no legal principle known to the court
will sustain such a distinction. A pardon is a deed to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is
tendered, and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a
court to force it on him.
There are also other practical effects to accepting pardons, such as waiving of fifth amendment rights relating to the pardoned crimes, since it would be impossible to self incriminate anymore. So there are reasons to refuse beyond "choosing to go to prison".
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It is possible to reject a pardon. Referring to United States v. Wilson:
There is nothing peculiar in a pardon which ought to distinguish it in
this respect from other facts; no legal principle known to the court
will sustain such a distinction. A pardon is a deed to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is
tendered, and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a
court to force it on him.
There are also other practical effects to accepting pardons, such as waiving of fifth amendment rights relating to the pardoned crimes, since it would be impossible to self incriminate anymore. So there are reasons to refuse beyond "choosing to go to prison".
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It is possible to reject a pardon. Referring to United States v. Wilson:
There is nothing peculiar in a pardon which ought to distinguish it in
this respect from other facts; no legal principle known to the court
will sustain such a distinction. A pardon is a deed to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is
tendered, and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a
court to force it on him.
There are also other practical effects to accepting pardons, such as waiving of fifth amendment rights relating to the pardoned crimes, since it would be impossible to self incriminate anymore. So there are reasons to refuse beyond "choosing to go to prison".
It is possible to reject a pardon. Referring to United States v. Wilson:
There is nothing peculiar in a pardon which ought to distinguish it in
this respect from other facts; no legal principle known to the court
will sustain such a distinction. A pardon is a deed to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is
tendered, and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a
court to force it on him.
There are also other practical effects to accepting pardons, such as waiving of fifth amendment rights relating to the pardoned crimes, since it would be impossible to self incriminate anymore. So there are reasons to refuse beyond "choosing to go to prison".
answered 4 hours ago
TelekaTeleka
2,520521
2,520521
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
I get a kick out of this part of that decision: "The power of pardon in criminal cases had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance." Was this really a necessary phrasing on their part?
– zibadawa timmy
3 hours ago
1
1
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
@zibadawatimmy - Early 1800s, maybe they still viewed England as be a Valdemort type of entity.
– PoloHoleSet
2 hours ago
add a comment |
The question is theoretical. But there's no need to theorize. There's at least one case of a convict successfully rejecting a presidential pardon. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in 1833, saying a pardon is "not completed without acceptance".
This case is touched upon in a previous answer to this post.
Here are excerpts from an article describing the case:
The Man Who Refused A
Pardon ~ CBMC
International
In 1829 two men, George Wilson and James Porter, robbed a United
States mail carrier. Both were subsequently captured and tried in a
court of law.
In May 1830 both men were found guilty of six charges, including
robbery of the mail "and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy."
Both Wilson and Porter received their sentences: Execution by hanging,
to be carried out on July 2.
Porter was executed on schedule, but Wilson was not.
Influential friends pleaded for mercy to the President of the United
States, Andrew Jackson, on his behalf. President Jackson issued a
formal pardon, dropping all charges. Wilson would have to serve only a
prison term of 20 years for his other crimes.
Incredibly, George Wilson refused the pardon!
An official report stated Wilson chose to "waive and decline any
advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the
pardon…."
The U.S. Supreme Court determined, "The court cannot give the prisoner
the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it... It is
a grant to him: it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he
pleases."
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "A pardon is an act of
grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws... (But) delivery is not completed without acceptance. It may
then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, and... we have
no power in a court to force it on him."
(emphasis mine)
Reference:
- United States v. Wilson, 1833
add a comment |
The question is theoretical. But there's no need to theorize. There's at least one case of a convict successfully rejecting a presidential pardon. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in 1833, saying a pardon is "not completed without acceptance".
This case is touched upon in a previous answer to this post.
Here are excerpts from an article describing the case:
The Man Who Refused A
Pardon ~ CBMC
International
In 1829 two men, George Wilson and James Porter, robbed a United
States mail carrier. Both were subsequently captured and tried in a
court of law.
In May 1830 both men were found guilty of six charges, including
robbery of the mail "and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy."
Both Wilson and Porter received their sentences: Execution by hanging,
to be carried out on July 2.
Porter was executed on schedule, but Wilson was not.
Influential friends pleaded for mercy to the President of the United
States, Andrew Jackson, on his behalf. President Jackson issued a
formal pardon, dropping all charges. Wilson would have to serve only a
prison term of 20 years for his other crimes.
Incredibly, George Wilson refused the pardon!
An official report stated Wilson chose to "waive and decline any
advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the
pardon…."
The U.S. Supreme Court determined, "The court cannot give the prisoner
the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it... It is
a grant to him: it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he
pleases."
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "A pardon is an act of
grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws... (But) delivery is not completed without acceptance. It may
then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, and... we have
no power in a court to force it on him."
(emphasis mine)
Reference:
- United States v. Wilson, 1833
add a comment |
The question is theoretical. But there's no need to theorize. There's at least one case of a convict successfully rejecting a presidential pardon. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in 1833, saying a pardon is "not completed without acceptance".
This case is touched upon in a previous answer to this post.
Here are excerpts from an article describing the case:
The Man Who Refused A
Pardon ~ CBMC
International
In 1829 two men, George Wilson and James Porter, robbed a United
States mail carrier. Both were subsequently captured and tried in a
court of law.
In May 1830 both men were found guilty of six charges, including
robbery of the mail "and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy."
Both Wilson and Porter received their sentences: Execution by hanging,
to be carried out on July 2.
Porter was executed on schedule, but Wilson was not.
Influential friends pleaded for mercy to the President of the United
States, Andrew Jackson, on his behalf. President Jackson issued a
formal pardon, dropping all charges. Wilson would have to serve only a
prison term of 20 years for his other crimes.
Incredibly, George Wilson refused the pardon!
An official report stated Wilson chose to "waive and decline any
advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the
pardon…."
The U.S. Supreme Court determined, "The court cannot give the prisoner
the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it... It is
a grant to him: it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he
pleases."
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "A pardon is an act of
grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws... (But) delivery is not completed without acceptance. It may
then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, and... we have
no power in a court to force it on him."
(emphasis mine)
Reference:
- United States v. Wilson, 1833
The question is theoretical. But there's no need to theorize. There's at least one case of a convict successfully rejecting a presidential pardon. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in 1833, saying a pardon is "not completed without acceptance".
This case is touched upon in a previous answer to this post.
Here are excerpts from an article describing the case:
The Man Who Refused A
Pardon ~ CBMC
International
In 1829 two men, George Wilson and James Porter, robbed a United
States mail carrier. Both were subsequently captured and tried in a
court of law.
In May 1830 both men were found guilty of six charges, including
robbery of the mail "and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy."
Both Wilson and Porter received their sentences: Execution by hanging,
to be carried out on July 2.
Porter was executed on schedule, but Wilson was not.
Influential friends pleaded for mercy to the President of the United
States, Andrew Jackson, on his behalf. President Jackson issued a
formal pardon, dropping all charges. Wilson would have to serve only a
prison term of 20 years for his other crimes.
Incredibly, George Wilson refused the pardon!
An official report stated Wilson chose to "waive and decline any
advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the
pardon…."
The U.S. Supreme Court determined, "The court cannot give the prisoner
the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it... It is
a grant to him: it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he
pleases."
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "A pardon is an act of
grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws... (But) delivery is not completed without acceptance. It may
then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, and... we have
no power in a court to force it on him."
(emphasis mine)
Reference:
- United States v. Wilson, 1833
edited 3 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
Michael_BMichael_B
7,09242026
7,09242026
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39100%2fcan-a-person-refuse-a-presidential-pardon%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Possible duplicate of Why is the US president allowed to grant a pardon
– Jasper
4 hours ago
@Jasper : why would it be a duplicate? It's about the same topic, but totally different question. The answers on that question don't focus on the possibility of refusing it.
– vsz
16 mins ago