SCOTUS does not have an honest bone left. They would rule that Trump is God-Emperor for life if they got the opportunity.

updating based on new information

What’s going on here?? It’s clearly unreviewable, but also the SC will be very conservative, making them even less likely to rule it unconstitutional.

https://x.com/jbarro/status/1281740322385678339

the pardon power is not universally unreviewable- eg if a President tried to pardon a state crime, that's clearly beyond the pardon power and would be subject to judicial review. The only authoritative legal opinion on the matter has been that of the Office of Legal Counsel who said that it is illegal.

Josh Barro also agrees that it's unsettled law.

Yes, you’re right that it’s still unsettled, but 60% unconstitutional seems way way high.

In fact, since this is n/a if he never tries, we would expect this to be quite low.

There's a certain level of communication between SCOTUS and the President, and he'll have a clear idea of whether they'll rule against him before he does it, making him much less likely to self-pardon if he gets the impression they'll say it's unconstitutional.

I think if that were the case we wouldn't see super embarrassing high profile SCOTUS cases like this one where the administration gets skewered over technicalities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Homeland_Security_v._Regents_of_the_University_of_California

https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/presidential-or-legislative-pardon-president

What part of the constitution are you thinking (genuine question from non US person!)

(Note this not a question about resolution)

The 0th amendment (no shenanigans or silly business)

Sorry I didn't see your question until now. I had two thoughts with this market. First, my understanding is that a pardon can only apply to a federal crime, not a state crime. So if Trump tries to pardon himself of a state crime, I was thinking about the pardon clause.

"The President [...] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

But what happens if Trump is charged with a federal crime and tries to pardon that? It would violate the 0th amendment (no shenanigans or silly business), for which the entire constitution is in play (if this was 15 years ago when I was doing moot court I could have given you a real answer, but I haven't seriously thought about law since then).

I honestly don't think there's an unspoken, unwritten, convention-only "0th amendment prohibiting shenanigans or silly business".

There seems to be a consensus among the legal profession that Article V is amendable, for example.

Yeah I was half joking, I'm not from the US so I have no clue how it would actually go down, but my intuitive expectation is that if someone games the system like pardoning themselves then the courts would rush to add that special case to the list of things that aren't allowed

the courts would rush to add that special case to the list of things that aren't allowed

I think that's how it should work, but not how it does. I don't even know who would have standing to file a lawsuit in that case, because the US doesn't have anything like a parquet.

Imagine knowing what a parquet is

This comment was made by shitty UK education system gang

The US president needs a document like this lol

https://www.reddit.com/r/SCP/comments/6naygw/the_things_dr_bright_is_not_allowed_to_do_at_the/

The Public Ministry, sometimes called the parquet by pretentious wankers, is kinda like prosecutors in other countries, but independent from any other branch of government and with authority to file suits against obvious shenanigans and silly business.

Ah, thanks

In the US it has widely and historically been the case that 'nobody is above' the laws and constitution. but to my knowledge it doesn't explicitly say that and also we're becoming so corrupt that they just make shit up. Look at the recent bump stock law decision from the supreme Court or how they said Pence could stop the certification on Jan 6th.

MAGA has been eroding our checks and balances to the point where Trump can say he's pardoned and even if the courts side against him who's to say he'll listen? The courts have no enforcement mechanism to make him compel.

Don't the police follow the courts?

In the US it has widely and historically been the case that 'nobody is above' the laws and constitution.

I mean, you did have lynchings, right? And all the Black Lives Matter and stuff. And gerrymandering. And a big etcetera.

Whatever norms the US supposedly already has in place are just not enough, and this phenomenon is much older than Trump