rule of law

A message from William R. Bay, President of the American Bar Association, February 10, 2025:

It has been three weeks since Inauguration Day. Most Americans recognize that newly elected leaders bring change. That is expected. But most Americans also expect that changes will take place in accordance with the rule of law and in an orderly manner that respects the lives of affected individuals and the work they have been asked to perform.Instead, we see wide-scale affronts to the rule of law itself, such as attacks on constitutionally protected birthright citizenship, the dismantling of USAID and the attempts to criminalize those who support lawful programs to eliminate bias and enhance diversity.

We have seen attempts at wholesale dismantling of departments and entities created by Congress without seeking the required congressional approval to change the law. There are efforts to dismiss employees with little regard for the law and protections they merit, and social media announcements that disparage and appear to be motivated by a desire to inflame without any stated factual basis. This is chaotic. It may appeal to a few. But it is wrong. And most Americans recognize it is wrong. It is also contrary to the rule of law.The American Bar Association supports the rule of law. That means holding governments, including our own, accountable under law. We stand for a legal process that is orderly and fair. We have consistently urged the administrations of both parties to adhere to the rule of law. We stand in that familiar place again today. And we do not stand alone. Our courts stand for the rule of law as well.Just last week, in rejecting citizenship challenges, the U.S. District Judge John Coughenour said that the rule of law is, according to this administration, something to navigate around or simply ignore. “Nevertheless,” he said, “in this courtroom and under my watch, the rule of law is a bright beacon which I intend to follow.” He is correct. The rule of law is a bright beacon for our country.In the last 21 days, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed alleging that the administration’s actions violate the rule of law and are contrary to the Constitution or laws of the United States. The list grows longer every day.

A preemptive pardon is an act of clemency issued by a head of state or government before charges are formally brought against an individual. Though relatively rare, this type of pardon can generate intense public and legal debate. To understand the complexities of preemptive pardons, it is necessary to examine their legal basis, potential benefits and drawbacks, as well as historical examples that illustrate their impact on justice, accountability, and executive authority.

Legal Basis for Preemptive Pardons

The legal authority for preemptive pardons in the United States is rooted in the Constitution and clarified through key judicial precedents. Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants the president the “Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” This broad language has been interpreted to allow for pardons at any stage of the judicial process, including before charges are formally brought—a concept known as a preemptive pardon.

Articles Tagged with rule of law

The ABA Supports the Rule of Law

Preemptive Pardons: Constitutional Authority and Real World Implications