Show HN: Pardonned.com – A searchable database of US Pardons

Post by solid_fuel » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:07 PM UTC

mandeepj wrote: post #126

9dev wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing would happen, because SCOTUS decided to grant the president immunity for any crime committed in their official function, which would be the case here. It would literally be possible for the president to order congress killed, offer an automatic pardon to anyone carrying out this order, and establish a monarchy. This single ruling will haunt the United States for the rest of its existence.

>SCOTUS decided to grant the president immunity for any crime committed in their official function That ruling is very broad and vague! I don't think killing Congress is part of POTUS's official job description. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-isnt-immune-from...

Post by frumplestlatz » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:16 PM UTC

foobarchu wrote: post #144

elAhmo wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notion itself that someone needs to be protected by a 'vengeful administration', while judicial system should be not politically affiliated is telling how broken the whole separation of powers is. Everyone who is a ruling party puts candidates they know aligned with their views, resulting in 'just wait until my turn comes and I will do as much as damage as possible' cycle.

> puts candidates they know aligned with their views, resulting in 'just wait until my turn comes and I will do as much as damage as possible' cycle. There is exactly one party in the US that does this, and it's because they have dedicated themselves to blocking the other party from accomplishing much of anything when they get power.

Post by frumplestlatz » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:20 PM UTC

lateforwork wrote: post #92

siliconc0w wrote: post #38

We should at least ban the "preemptive" pardon if not all pardons. Pardon means forgiveness for a specific convicted crime, not a means to grant blanket immunity.

There are two types here: (1) Pardons for crimes not yet committed. (2) Pardons for crimes committed, but not yet convicted. The first type will allow the pardoned to commit a crime in the future for free, which obviously should not be allowed. The second should be allowed if we have this pardon system at all. The second type became a political necessity, for example to protect Liz Cheney from a vengeful administrati…

Post by miltonlost » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:29 PM UTC

mattmaroon wrote: post #162

foobarchu wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> puts candidates they know aligned with their views, resulting in 'just wait until my turn comes and I will do as much as damage as possible' cycle. There is exactly one party in the US that does this, and it's because they have dedicated themselves to blocking the other party from accomplishing much of anything when they get power.

No. While I don’t like Trump and never did, several of the prosecutions against him were political. By political, I mean they would not have happened if he had not become a politician, in fact, they didn’t until he became one and an unpopular one at that. And he’s doing much worse now so that’s two.

Post by WillPostForFood » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:35 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #152

lateforwork wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two types here: (1) Pardons for crimes not yet committed. (2) Pardons for crimes committed, but not yet convicted. The first type will allow the pardoned to commit a crime in the future for free, which obviously should not be allowed. The second should be allowed if we have this pardon system at all. The second type became a political necessity, for example to protect Liz Cheney from a vengeful administrati…

> a political necessity, for example to protect Liz Cheney IANACL but surely there are other ways to protect people from politically motivated prosecutions? E.g. jail anybody attempting to direct the DOJ for personal or political reasons?