Congress passed a bill prohibiting the president from granting a pardon to any person who had not served at least one-third of the sentence imposed by the court which convicted that person. The President vetoed the bill claiming that it was unconstitutional. Nevertheless, Congress passed it over the President’s veto by a two-thirds vote of each house.
This act of Congress is:
A. Constitutional, because it was enacted over the President’s veto by a two-thirds vote of each house.
B. Constitutional, because it is a necessary and proper means of carrying out the powers of Congress.
C. Unconstitutional, because it interferes with the plenary power of the President to grant pardons.
D. Unconstitutional, because a presidential veto based upon constitutional grounds may be overridden only with the concurrence of three-fourths of the state legislatures.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Answer C is correct. The President has the plenary power to pardon federal crimes. This is a rare instance in constitutional law where there is no limit on a governmental power.
(Examsmanship Note: When responding to constitutional law questions, the general rule is that an answer choice that refers to a plenary power is a wrong answer, because powers by their nature are not plenary.) This question is the exception which proves the rule. The President does have the plenary power to pardon federal crimes. Here, even though the word “plenary” is contained in the correct answer, it is still wise to eliminate such answer choices.
Answer A is incorrect. Here, the statute purports to modify the President’s power to pardon under Article II of the Constitution which contains no such limitation. An act of Congress that is directly contrary to a provision of the Constitution is invalid.
Answer B is incorrect. The source of congressional power to enact this statute is irrelevant. Here, the statute purports to modify the President’s power to pardon under Article II of the Constitution which contains no such limitation. An act of Congress that is directly contrary to a provision of the Constitution is invalid.
Answer D is incorrect, because it attempts to mingle the process of amending the Constitution with an attempt to limit the presidential pardon power. There is no question that the Constitution could be amended to limit the presidential pardon power. Such an amendment would require, in addition to the concurrence of three-fourths of the state legislators, that the proposed amendment be labeled an amendment and be passed in the first instance by a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress.
C – I think this is an exclusively Executive right not given to the other branches to change or limit.
C. Only the president has the power to pardon.
c
Thank you very much for the Q & A…Good luck everyone!!!
A or C–I am going with C…
C.
C.
C