Midnight armed raids, seize documents, arrest for whatever reason you like (blanket pardons cover all crimes y'know), build respective cases.
Perhaps guilt admission is no longer part of pardoning, but pardoning itself implies potential criminal action to be investigated.
There are substantial differences between legislative immunity and a pardon; the latter carries an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it, while the former is noncommittal, and tantamount to silence of the witness.
In 2021 the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals set new precedent and ruled President Trump’s pardon of Clint Lorance did not imply guilt. That ruling has been cited as precedent in a 5th Circuit ruling.
Correct. There's still the issue of what preemptive pardoning should truly entail. So you could feasibly just start investigating them (probable cause or whatever?) because, by making the pardons, Biden has arguably identified things for which to pardon them.
I'm not quite getting how Part 3 is supposed to work.
Midnight armed raids, seize documents, arrest for whatever reason you like (blanket pardons cover all crimes y'know), build respective cases.
Perhaps guilt admission is no longer part of pardoning, but pardoning itself implies potential criminal action to be investigated.
Burdick v. United States (1915):
But it was dicta so still debatable if precedent.
That has been countered in 2021: https://xcancel.com/JayOrsi/status/1881358908109000948
Ah. Thanks.
They could still try to argue it again and go all the way to SCOTUS though, right? Not to say it wouldn't be a waste of time.
Correct. There's still the issue of what preemptive pardoning should truly entail. So you could feasibly just start investigating them (probable cause or whatever?) because, by making the pardons, Biden has arguably identified things for which to pardon them.