Democrats seek to limit presidential pardons amid concerns of influence

Representative Levin stated in an interview with CBS News that the current system allows individuals to “literally, for the highest dollar amount, can go and buy a pardon.” He emphasized that this deviates from the Founders’ original intent, which was to reserve the pardon power for cases of justice and mercy.

While the bill faces significant obstacles and is unlikely to overcome a potential presidential veto, it signals how Democrats, bolstered by recent midterm victories, intend to scrutinize Trump’s use of the pardon power. A CBS News investigation revealed that wealthy defendants have engaged lobbyists and lawyers with ties to the president to advocate for pardons.

Approximately 70% of Trump’s clemency actions during his second term bypassed the Justice Department’s pardon office, a figure rising to 92% when including those related to the January 6th defendants. The White House has dismissed concerns, asserting that those seeking pardons through lobbying are “foolishly wasting their money” and that a “robust pardon review process” is in place, involving White House counsel, the Justice Department, “pardon czar” Alice Johnson, and the president.

White House Counsel Will Scharf defended Trump’s actions, stating, “President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner and to suggest so otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious.”

The proposed legislation would mandate that the Justice Department’s inspector general investigate pardons raising conflict-of-interest concerns. Levin cited examples such as the pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, who pleaded guilty in 2023 to anti-money-laundering violations, and reports linking Alina Habba Mildon to a deal with a Venezuelan billionaire’s family prior to his pardon.

The bill would also explicitly allow for the prosecution of the president and vice president if pardons are exchanged for something of value, require pardon recipients to disclose gifts to projects associated with the president, and prohibit self-pardons, a power Trump has claimed but stated he doesn’t anticipate using.

Representative Crow stated, “No president should be able to abuse the pardon power. We cannot accept a two-tiered system of justice that treats the wealthy and well-connected differently than working people.”

Legal experts consulted by CBS News suggest the bill could face constitutional challenges. Former Justice Department pardon attorney-adviser Samuel Morison argues that regulating the pardon power through legislation is unconstitutional, suggesting impeachment is the appropriate remedy for its misuse. Others express concern that the bill’s broad definition of “conflict of interest” could lead to unwarranted investigations, potentially impacting future administrations as well.

Despite these challenges, Levin maintains that reforms to the pardon power are necessary, extending beyond concerns about President Trump’s actions to include instances in previous administrations. He emphasized the intent to use congressional oversight to ensure independent investigations.