How Many Pardons Can a President Issue?

In the United States, the power to grant pardons or commutations is one of the most significant executive powers that the President wields. This power, enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, allows a President to directly influence outcomes of federal criminal cases. However, the number of pardons a President can issue is not strictly quantified, which leads to frequent queries and discussions about whether there is a constitutional limit to this authority.

A Historical Overview of Presidential Pardons

Since the inception of the presidency, numerous presidents have used their pardon power to right perceived injustices or to improve public perception. According to data compiled by Politico, the table below outlines the number of pardons granted by various presidents, excluding the current Biden administration:

President Term Pardons Franklin D. Roosevelt 1933-1945 2,819 Harry S. Truman 1945-1953 1,913 Dwight D. Eisenhower 1953-1961 1,110 Woodrow Wilson 1913-1921 1,087 Lyndon B. Johnson 1963-1969 960 Richard Nixon 1969-1974 863 Calvin Coolidge 1923-1929 773 Herbert Hoover 1929-1933 672 Theodore Roosevelt 1901-1909 668 Jimmy Carter 1977-1981 534 John F. Kennedy 1961-1963 472 Bill Clinton 1993-2001 396 Ronald Reagan 1981-1989 393 William H. Taft 1909-1913 383 Gerald Ford 1974-1977 382 Warren G. Harding 1921-1923 383 William McKinley 1897-1901 291 Barack Obama 2009-2017 212 George W. Bush 2001-2009 189 Donald J. Trump 2017-2021 143 George H.W. Bush 1989-1993 74

These statistics illustrate the wide variation in the use of this power by different presidents. However, it is important to note that amnesties are not included in these totals. Amnesty, a form of general pardon, is reserved for groups of individuals and is often used in response to social or political issues, as seen during former president Gerald Ford's pardon of thousands of soldiers who evaded the draft during the Vietnam War.

Contractual Limitations on Presidential Pardons

While the President is not limited in the number of pardons, there are certain limitations regarding the crimes involved. According to the U.S. Constitution, a President can pardon offenses against the United States but cannot pardon individuals for impeachment. This means that a President can provide relief from federal criminal charges or sentences but cannot intervene in a case where an individual is under impeachment proceedings.

In addition, a presidential pardon applies only to federal crimes and crimes committed in federal court. State crimes require state-level pardons. This aspect of the power is highlighted by the historical examples listed above, showing that the number of federal pardons granted is far greater than state pardons, reflecting the vast powers that the presidency holds.

Historically, presidents often use their pardoning power in controversial circumstances. For instance, former president Donald J. Trump was known for his use of pardons to protect associates from prosecution, as seen in the case of Roger Stone, a political operative who was pardoned under Trump's administration.

Framers' Intent and Abuse of Power

It is crucial to understand why the framers of the Constitution chose to grant this wide-ranging authority to the President. As stated by Bill Bartholomew, an Assistant Director for the Constitution Project, the framers sought to correct unjust prosecutions and convictions that were prevalent in English common law. The pardoning power was intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary and unjust application of the law.

However, the exercise of this power by presidents over the years has also led to concerns about abuse. The concept of abuse in this context often centers around pardoning individuals for political expediency or to avoid embarrassing revelations. As Nixon’s pardon of Watergate conspirators highlights, the power can be used to shield individuals from the consequences of their actions, which can be perceived as inappropriate use of executive authority.

Ultimately, the number of presidential pardons is not dictated by a rigid limit, but rather by the discretion of the executive branch. As the data shows, some presidents exercise this power quite extensively, while others do not. This power remains one of the most significant checks and balances that the presidency can use to influence the judicial process and maintain the integrity of the justice system.