The Covid Emergency is Over

[Primemuscle]

I don't even know how it's possible to give someone a preemptive pardon.

Apparently, this is possible because U.S. presidents have the authority to issue preemptive pardons for federal offenses that have already occurred, but for which no charges have yet been filed.

[Dos Equis]

Apparently, this is possible because U.S. presidents have the authority to issue preemptive pardons for federal offenses that have already occurred, but for which no charges have yet been filed.

Says who?

[Primemuscle]

Says who?

Says Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States.

Article II  Executive Branch
Section 2 Powers
Clause 1 Military, Administrative, and Clemency
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/section-2

The Supreme Court:
Ex parte Garland (1866): The Supreme Court affirmed that the president's power to pardon is broad and can be exercised "after the commission of an offense," but not for future offenses.

[Dos Equis]

Says Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States.

Article II  Executive Branch
Section 2 Powers
Clause 1 Military, Administrative, and Clemency
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/section-2

Which part of Article II says the pardon power applies to offenses someone has not been charged with? 

[Primemuscle]

Which part of Article II says the pardon power applies to offenses someone has not been charged with?

As interpreted by the Supreme Court, all of Article II, section 2 applies.

Apparently, you missed part of my previous post which refers to The Supreme Court's take on this:

Ex parte Garland (1866): The Supreme Court affirmed that the president's power to pardon is broad and can be exercised "after the commission of an offense," but not for future offenses. Note: the Anthony Fauci preemptive pardon, issued in January 2025, was a blanket clemency for any potential federal offenses Fauci may have committed during his public service between January 1, 2014, and the date of the pardon. 

The phrase "Offenses against the United States" is broad enough to include offenses for which a person has not yet been charged.
The Supreme Court has confirmed the broad scope of this power, noting that a pardon "blots out the offense" and can cover all types of pardons known at common law.

As a result of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic which held a hearing titled “A Hearing with Dr. Anthony Fauci" in 2024, has Dr. Fauci been charged with crimes? If a Presidential preemptive pardon is not valid as you suggest, why has he not been so charged?

[Dos Equis]

You missed part of my previous post which refers The Supreme Court:
Ex parte Garland (1866): The Supreme Court affirmed that the president's power to pardon is broad and can be exercised "after the commission of an offense," but not for future offenses. Note: the Anthony Fauci preemptive pardon, issued in January 2025, was a blanket clemency for any potential federal offenses Fauci may have committed during his public service between January 1, 2014, and the date of the pardon. 

The phrase "Offenses against the United States" is broad enough to include offenses for which a person has not yet been charged.
The Supreme Court has confirmed the broad scope of this power, noting that a pardon "blots out the offense" and can cover all types of pardons known at common law.

Link please.  I'd like to read exactly where you are getting this from.

[Primemuscle]

Link please.  I'd like to read exactly where you are getting this from.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/%5B%27pardon%27,%20%27constitution%27%5D#:~:text=In%20the%201886%20case%20Ex,alter%20it%20with%20certain%20conditions.

"In the 1886 case Ex parte Garland, the Court referred to the President’s authority to pardon as unlimited except in cases of impeachment, extending to every offence known to the law and able to be exercised either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.3 Much later, the Court wrote that the broad power conferred in the Constitution gives the President plenary authority to 'forgive’ [a] convicted person in part or entirely, to reduce a penalty in terms of a specified number of years, or to alter it with certain conditions."

[Dos Equis]

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/%5B%27pardon%27,%20%27constitution%27%5D#:~:text=In%20the%201886%20case%20Ex,alter%20it%20with%20certain%20conditions.

"In the 1886 case Ex parte Garland, the Court referred to the President’s authority to pardon as unlimited except in cases of impeachment, extending to every offence known to the law and able to be exercised either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.3 Much later, the Court wrote that the broad power conferred in the Constitution gives the President plenary authority to 'forgive’ [a] convicted person in part or entirely, to reduce a penalty in terms of a specified number of years, or to alter it with certain conditions."

Thanks.  I read it.  This is helpful.  I think this part actually supports the "preemptive" pardon:

"Beyond textual limits, certain external constitutional and legal considerations may act as constraints on the power. For instance, the Court has indicated that the power may be exercised at any time after [an offense’s] commission,8 reflecting that the President may not preemptively immunize future criminal conduct."

[illuminati]

Children’s Health Defense
@ChildrensHD

Fauci said the shot would add to natural immunity.

The reality? It weakened it.

The vaccine antibodies hijack the virus, blocking your natural ones (the ones that actually work).

The result? Lower immunity. More sickness.

Fauci’s advice didn’t just fail—it left people worse off.

Why are people are still taking this shot?

https://x.com/ChildrensHD/status/1973372699251552566

Prime will disagree with you he's right now feverishly Googling
long articles to copy & paste on here   

[Primemuscle]

Thanks.  I read it.  This is helpful.  I think this part actually supports the "preemptive" pardon:

"Beyond textual limits, certain external constitutional and legal considerations may act as constraints on the power. For instance, the Court has indicated that the power may be exercised at any time after [an offense’s] commission,8 reflecting that the President may not preemptively immunize future criminal conduct."

Glad you were able to decipher this out of all the legal jargon. I had to read it over several times and frankly it was still rather confusing. But then, I am neither a legal or constitutional expert, just an ordinary person trying to understand this.

One thing about constitutions and bylaws I have noticed is the more they are amended the more complicated they are to make sense out of. Every year prior to the Oregon School Employees  Association conference (OSEA) members and chapters submit resolutions which when passed at conference change the language in the OSEA constitution, usually adding more language intended to clarify the constitution and bylaws. Rather than clarify these "amendments" often have the opposite affect.

[herne]

.