this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
64 points (94.4% liked)
World News
34 readers
89 users here now
News from outside of Australia
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The Supreme Court isn't going to do that. Art. 2 Sec. 2 and the 5A's double jeopardy clauses are quite clear on the matter.
They'd sooner overrule Wickard v. Filburn than do that.
They wont do it because it would set precident for if the dems ever do get back into power to do it right back to them.
I doubt double jeopardy applies, because that would mean they’d charge and prosecute him again. Reversing a pardon has nothing to do with prosecution.
Also there is nothing in the constitution that states a pardon is final. Only the Supreme Court has said that, and we all know that a later Supreme Court can (and has) overrule a previous Supreme Court decision.
And Wickard v. Filburn is a red herring.
"nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;"
The double jeopardy clause doesn't limit itself to only prohibiting second prosecutions. Once a case has been prosecuted to conclusion the defendant may not be made subject to the punishment again. A pardon terminating a punishment, would forestall recision as that would be once again subjecting the defendant for the same offensive.