Conservative News Daily

Levin disagrees: Trump can pardon himself from state charges as POTUS.

Fox⁣ News Host Mark Levin Argues‌ Trump Could ⁤Pardon Himself​ from ⁤State Charges as President

Fox News host and ⁢former Reagan Justice Department‍ official Mark Levin‍ has taken⁤ a contrary view to other legal experts, arguing that ⁤former President ⁢Donald Trump would be⁢ able ‍to‍ pardon himself from ⁣state⁣ criminal convictions should he ⁢be elected president in 2024.

The general​ understanding is that Trump, as‍ president again,‍ would only ‌have ‍the⁤ authority under the U.S. Constitution to pardon⁣ himself from⁣ federal offenses,‍ such as the‍ charges brought in Miami and Washington, D.C., by special‌ counsel Jack Smith’s​ office.

The ⁣Miami federal indictment ⁢relates to Trump’s alleged⁤ mishandling of classified documents and the D.C. criminal charges center⁤ on his ⁢questioning of​ the integrity of the 2020 ⁣election.

On‌ Tuesday, Fulton County District ‌Attorney Fani Willis charged Trump and other co-defendants⁢ with crimes related to their alleged‍ efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley and former federal prosecutor Andrew‍ McCarthy, both Fox News contributors, contend ⁢that while Trump could pardon himself from federal crimes, he would ⁤not be able ‍to do so if he is convicted in Georgia.

“There is no federal pardon option for​ Georgia. Indeed, it ‌is even hard ‍to​ secure⁣ a⁣ state pardon, which is not issued⁢ by the​ governor but a pardon board,” Turley wrote for the Daily‌ Beast.

Outlets like CBS ⁣News have also ⁢reported that Trump would not be able⁤ to ‌pardon⁤ himself from state-level crimes.

However, Levin, who was chief of‍ staff ​to Attorney General ⁣Edwin Meese during the Reagan administration, takes a counterview.

He tweeted Tuesday, “President Trump​ can, in fact, ‍pardon himself from the GA‌ charges if ​he is elected president.”

Levin argued that ⁣the same reasoning the DOJ has employed⁣ to conclude a president is⁣ shielded from criminal‍ prosecution at the federal level applies at the state level, too.

“1. The Constitution’s silent⁢ about whether a⁢ president can⁢ be indicted,” ⁤the conservative commentator tweeted.

“2. The‍ DOJ⁣ has taken the position under both parties that you cannot indict a sitting president because it would ‍cripple the⁣ executive branch and make his ability to defend‍ himself effectively impossible.

“3. Given⁤ the DOJ’s position, and the⁢ Supremacy Clause in the Constitution, I would argue strongly⁣ that the idea that a​ president ‌cannot ‍be indicted​ at the federal ‌level⁤ because it would cripple the executive branch, but can be indicted​ by local DAs, would‍ have exactly the same⁤ effect as a​ federal⁢ indictment, except there are ​thousands of local ‌and‌ state prosecutors making the crippling of a⁤ president ⁢even ⁤more likely.

“4. FURTHERMORE, if indicted and even convicted, the ‍idea that ​a president cannot pardon​ himself from state charges is absurd, again, not only because of the Supremacy Clause, but the same considerations that apply‌ to ‍a ‌federal conviction would obviously apply to a ‌state conviction.

“Therefore,⁢ I ⁤disagree with ‌Jonathan Turley’s view and others⁣ who ‍keep ‍repeating it,” Levin concluded.

The Supremacy Clause, Article ‌VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, provides, “This Constitution,​ and the Laws ⁣of the United States which⁢ shall ⁣be made ​in Pursuance thereof … ​shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ⁢and the Judges in every State shall‌ be ⁤bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the​ Contrary notwithstanding.”

Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute explained that ​the Supremacy Clause “establishes ‌that the federal‌ constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state ​laws, and even state ⁤constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the ​federal government’s exercise of ⁤its constitutional powers.”

Levin’s ​argument is‌ that this clause means a state court would not be able ⁢to ‍do what a‍ federal court could not ⁣in relation to preventing the president from performing‍ his job under the Constitution.

In ​other words, a ‍state cannot trump the ⁤federal government in this ‍matter. ⁣Georgia could not force ​a President Trump to try to govern from a state ​jail.

The remedy provided by the Constitution for a president who is believed‌ to have engaged in criminal⁤ wrongdoing⁤ is for Congress⁢ to impeach ‌him or ‌her.

Levin makes a compelling case. We’ll see what the future holds as the U.S.‌ continues to navigate uncharted constitutional waters.

The post Levin​ Takes Counterview:‌ Trump Would Have Power as‌ POTUS ‌to Pardon Himself from State Charges, Too appeared first on The Western Journal.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker