this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
204 points (99.0% liked)

News

33617 readers
2076 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/31454550

The president’s stated intention to pardon Tina Peters, jailed for tampering with election machines in 2020, has set off a legal fight over the extent of Mr. Trump’s pardon powers.

...

Mr. Ticktin argued that Mr. Trump has the power to free Ms. Peters under an untested legal theory that the Constitution’s language allowing the president to pardon people for offenses “against the United States” applied not just to federal crimes but also to state-level charges.

“The President of the United States has the power to grant a pardon in any of the states of the United States,” Mr. Ticktin wrote in a letter to Mr. Trump last week that portrayed Ms. Peters as a political prisoner who could be a witness to investigations into the false claims that the election was stolen from Mr. Trump.

Legal scholars and Colorado officials were incredulous. They said the notion that the president could intervene in state courts clashed with the plain language of the Constitution, as well as its fundamental principles of federalism and states’ rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 38 points 2 days ago (2 children)

So it will go to the Supreme Court and they will say everything is fine, don't worry (my prediction).

We shouldn't be giving the President more power. So this is another reveal as to true intentions if I am right. Was this always the goal of the leadership, or a more recent post 2000 development through coup or corruption?

Not Trump, but those who are making Trump filthy rich. Did they pull the old switcheroo?

[–] errer@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Trump being able to pardon state crimes has huge implications for himself and his cronies. He can rig any election he wants at any level and no one can stop him. It would be a wild expansion of power.

[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

All this stuff is so crazy short-sighted.

At what point does the president have so much power and that someone in the line of succession can assassinate everyone up the line and then just pardon themselves since they are not president.

If the Supreme Court signals they does like that anymore, do some more assassinating before they can change it back.

[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

They are not concerned with the "line of succession", as party leadership dictate the line of succession. Also, they have a long history of assassinating when they deem it necessary, they are pro assassination.

[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

There's no need to rig elections, friend. It's been done and pay-for-play for decades.

(in our political system whoever spends the most money wins over 90% of elections; the outliers are handicapped or pressured into compliance in a myriad of ways)

Why cheat when you write the law? That's silly, only rubes even bother to try; small town mayors and the like.

Also, recall our Supreme Court is for sale.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So it will go to the Supreme Court and they will say everything is fine

What is not clear to me is how it will get there...normally there is a case that is raised from state to federal court. But afaik a pardon is not a case, it's just...a unilateral executive order of some kind (obviously ianal). If it were a federal conviction, obviously CO wouldn't have any jurisdiction to refuse. But if this was a state matter, and there's no "case" to escalate to SCOTUS, I'm not actually sure what happens next.....maybe he tries sending in the national guard to enforce his order, and the state challenges it, and that goes all the way to SCOTUS?

A pardon isn’t a case until CO refuse to recognize it and they sue the state over it. Which they absolutely will do because it costs them literally nothing to drain down the national coffers.