A Necessary and Enduring Power
by Matthew Elias Koch

The recent scandal around Bill Clinton’s pardoning Mark Rich has called into question the President’s absolute power to pardon. The power to pardon is one of the few the President has without interference from Congress. It is important to understand why the founding fathers gave it to the President, and it is equally important to evaluate whether their reasons are still valid today.

The absolute authority of a chief executive of a nation to pardon is a tradition that dates back to the eighteenth century when European monarchs had the power to release prisoners at their whim. In the colonies, the King’s power to pardon was delegated to the governors who after the revolution retained that authority.

The weak central government that was created under the Articles of Confederation lacked the power to grant pardons, but during the first constitutional convention in 1787, the authority to pardon was given to the President. This was a time of economic chaos, and the founders reasoned that a strong executive branch would be able to promote stability and the President’s power could be used to quell civil disorder. Alexander Hamilton stated that the power to pardon gave the President the power to “restore the tranquility of the commonwealth.”

In the twentieth century there are several cases in which unpopular pardons have been granted in order to promote national stability. In 1974, Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for “any and all crimes” he committed while he was President. His decision was highly controversial and unpopular. If Nixon had not been pardoned, the effects of a trial and possible conviction of an American President could have been disastrous to the nation.

Jimmy Carter pardoned Vietnam War draft resistors, allowing thousands of Americans to live their lives in peace, without the threat of criminal charges. This pardon was necessary to overcome the legacy of the war and to heal the nation. It could not have occurred if Congress or a committee had to approve.

The founders chose to overlook the risk of giving sole power to the President because they felt the benefits of necessary and responsible pardons outweighed the repercussions of irresponsible pardons. When Clinton pardoned Mark Rich and others, he may have misused his power to pardon, but this does not mean that the Constitution should be changed. The damage that unwarranted pardons may inflict is far outweighed by the benefits that a necessary and well-timed pardon can offer. Consider the years of trials necessary had Nixon not been pardoned, or the suffering of draft resistors had Carter not pardoned them. Mark Rich has long been absent from our national consciousness, and he will surely soon be forgotten again.

Matthew, a senior at York Preparatory School in Manhattan, will be attending Dartmouth in the fall.

Education Update, Inc., P.O. Box 20005, New York, NY 10001. Tel: (212) 481-5519. Fax: (212) 481-3919. Email: ednews1@aol.com.
All material is copyrighted and may not be printed without express consent of the publisher. © 2001.