Constitutional Law

READ: New Brief Argues Trump Violated Constitution With Arpaio Pardon

Another day, another constitutional challenge for the Trump administration.

By  
on

Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Berkeley’s Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and retired professor Michael Tigar and attorney Jane Tigar have filed a proposed amicus brief arguing that President Donald Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio is void as unconstitutional. While it would be shocking to America’s core to believe Donald Trump has taken any action without thorough and respectful fidelity to the Constitution, the legal experts claim the pardon fails for three reasons.

First, if one reads the pardon power narrowly, it only extends to “offenses against the United States,” which arguably doesn’t include criminal contempt, a punishment for violating court imposed guidelines. Second, that there is a fundamental principle allowing Article III courts to provide redress when public officials breach the Constitution. That ship seems as though it sailed in 1974, but whatever. Finally, that the courts have the inherent power to enforce their own orders.

The full proposed brief follows:

HeadshotJoe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Sponsored

Topics

, , , ,