2007-11-29 16:09:18 · 5 answers · asked by Patsy B. 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Governors have that power in their states as well. I don't think it's a bad thing that there be at least one avenue of possible remedy when courts are restrained by law. What I mean is, courts have to apply the law, but sometimes a situation deserves mercy that is not in the judge's power to grant. If there were no pardon authority, there would be no recourse outside of the courts.
(That is not to say that it's always used wisely.)
2007-11-29 16:25:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Question is NOT about "fairness", it's about the Power & the Choices Presidents have to make in such decisions. In the Autumn of 1974, the country was in an Uproar because President Ford pardoned Nixon from the Watergate Scandal...-and it probably cost Ford the Election two years later... 30 years later- most of those same people reluctantly admit that Ford probably did the right thing for the Country. What Ford did was NEVER a Question of "fairness"; it was about doing what He thought was right for the Times. It's a privledge that comes with the Office.
2007-11-29 16:25:45 · answer #2 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely; political parameters insure that it will not be abused and courts can only see the letter of the law (by design) - not the big picture.
2007-11-29 16:29:17 · answer #3 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is constitutional power (Article 2). Personally, I do not believe it is unfair at all.
2007-11-29 16:15:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it is fair, because as the leader of our country it is a power he needs to have at his disposale
2007-11-29 16:14:09 · answer #5 · answered by Brock 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋