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 Hidden Threat: How Fake Identities used by Remote Employees Put Your Business at Risk—and How to Defend Against This
Based on our experience in recent client matters, we have seen an escalating threat posed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) information technology (IT) workers engaging in sophisticated schemes to evade US and UN sanctions, steal intellectual property from US companies, and/or inject ransomware into company IT environments, in support of enhancing North Korea’s illicit weapons program.
The full proposed brief follows:
[pdfjs-viewer url=”https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/09/Chemerinsky-Amicus-Arpaio-20170911.pdf”]
Joe 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.