CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:3
Arguments:3
Total Votes:3
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (3)

Debate Creator

DarthPrime(37) pic



Blanket pardon by Trump for oversentenced drug offenders




N.F.L. Players to Trump: Here’s Whom You Should Pardon

Add New Argument
1 point

Clearly this is a President who cares about rule of law...

Watson is incorrect if he thinks one President using his kingly powers will bring systemic change. But Trump is clever on this front. If he pardons people here and there, people will like him, but if he pushes for legislative changes, his base will think he has gone too far and he will lose support. Pardons aren’t change, they are symbolic. And they should be restricted.

excon(18260) Disputed
1 point

Pardons aren’t change, they are symbolic. And they should be restricted.

Hello A,

I dunno.. I read the Constitution.. I didn't find any RULES for presidential pardons... He can pardon ANYONE convicted of a federal offense, or ANYONE who's under investigation by the feds.. Trump can use them as a MESSAGE, or to affect real CHANGE...

When you made up those rules, did you make up one that said he can pardon HIMSELF?? I'll bet you did.

excon

Amarel(5669) Disputed
1 point

I dunno.. I read the Constitution.. I didn't find any RULES for presidential pardons...

Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

Trump can use them as a MESSAGE, or to affect real CHANGE...

Laws are real change, pardons are not.

When you made up those rules, did you make up one that said he can pardon HIMSELF?? I'll bet you did.

I didn’t make up any rules. Trump probably could pardon himself which would be a great way to get impeached, thus nullifying any self-pardon.

When I say this presidential power should be restricted, it’s not because of some rule. It’s because it makes the President more King-like that a nation of laws should have. Just because it’s in the Constitution doesn’t mean it’s good. I wouldn’t have supported Constitutional prohibition, and I don’t currently support the 16th.