Law Prof to Senators: Trump Can't Pardon Himself
A group of law professors testified before Congress on Tuesday on how to protect special counsel Robert Mueller from removal and separation of powers issues.
September 26, 2017 at 03:17 PM
3 minute read
President Donald Trump cannot use his presidential authority to pardon himself, a Yale law professor told lawmakers Tuesday.
Testifying in a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on separation of powers issues, Akhil Reed Amar of Yale Law School said one of the basic principles of the rule of law is that “no man can be a judge in his own case.” Asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, what that meant about the president's power to pardon himself, Amar replied, “He has no such power.”
Sen. Al Franken, D-Minnesota, pushed Amar to clarify his reasoning later in the hearing.
“If you can't be a judge in your own case, you can't pardon yourself,” Amar said. “In the same way you can't be a judge in your own case, you can't be a pardoner in your own case.”
The hearing focused on two bipartisan bills in the Senate aimed at protecting Robert Mueller and future special counsels from being fired by the president without cause. Though the two bills have some different provisions, both provide for speedy judicial review if a special counsel is fired.
Senators peppered a witness panel of four law professors with questions on whether inviting the judicial branch to review executive law enforcement decisions violated separation of powers principles. Amar argued that because the president cannot “make Mueller go away with his pardon pen,” he must retain his ability to fire Mueller under the Constitution, because the special counsel's role is technically an “inferior officer” position that does not require Senate confirmation. He said if Trump could not fire Mueller, the special counsel would no longer be “inferior” within the meaning of the Constitution.
Eric Posner, University of Chicago School of Law professor and son of recently retired Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner, said he was not sure the principle Amar referred to truly exists. But he agreed with the logic, and noted where else it might apply.
“If there is a non-self-dealing principle in the Constitution, then it would forbid both self-pardoning and firing a prosecutor who's investigating you,” Posner said. “The two things are basically the same.”
Stephen Vladeck of the University of Texas School of Law said the question may not ever play out in real life for political reasons.
“In practical terms, the answer to that question may remain purely academic, because at the point at which the president is purported to pardon himself, I have to think that that's when the House would seriously consider exercising its impeachment power,” Vladeck said.
One of the bills, S 1735, is sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, and Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut. The other, S 1741, is sponsored by Sens. Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, and Chris Coons, D-Delaware.
Both were introduced in August when press reports indicated Trump was considering firing Mueller, who is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with the president's campaign. Trump later said he was not considering any such action.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWill GOP-Led Senate, House Move to Repeal Biden's Late Regulations as Law Provides?
US Supreme Court Weighs Federal Agencies' Duty Under National Environmental Policy Act
FDA Defends Rejection of Vape-Flavor Applications Before Sympathetic Supreme Court
'Nuclear Option'?: Eli Lilly Taps Big Law Firms in Federal Drug Pricing Dispute
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.