Key Takeaways
• Former DOJ pardon attorney Liz Oyer warns that Trump pardons have led to dangerous repeat crimes.
• Many Jan. 6 defendants pardoned on Inauguration Day reoffended, including in violent schemes.
• Trump issued roughly 1,500 pardons without vetting by the Justice Department.
• Ignoring a merit-based review of clemency applicants undermines public safety and trust.
• Congressional Republicans have yet to challenge the fallout from these Pardons.
Trump pardons cause safety concerns
Former Justice Department pardon attorney Liz Oyer warns that President Trump’s recent use of his clemency power has already backfired. She says that many January 6 defendants pardoned on his first day back in office have reoffended. Some face serious new charges, such as plotting to harm public officials or engaging in sexual crimes. These cases show that bypassing a careful review can have dangerous results.
How Trump pardons bypassed safeguards
In her New York Times guest essay, Oyer explains that the morning after his inauguration, Trump granted about 1,500 pardons tied to the Capitol riot. Even so, he never asked her office to vet them. Over the next three days, he added 27 more. Prior presidents always consulted the Justice Department’s pardon attorney, who assesses character, remorse and public safety risks. Trump did not.
Why careful clemency matters
A merit-based review helps spot risks before release. First, it includes background checks and interviews. Next, it weighs the severity of the crime and the person’s behavior in prison. Finally, the pardon attorney briefs the president in writing. By contrast, Trump’s rush cut out all these steps. Consequently, he pardoned people who then returned to crime.
Alarming cases of recidivism
For example, one pardoned defendant faces new sex‐exploitation charges. Another is accused of plotting to kill federal employees. Others threatened judges and public officials. Oyer notes that some recipients from Trump’s first term have already gone back to prison after new convictions. These stories highlight the real danger in ignoring a structured review process.
Comparing past practices
Former presidents, including Biden, Clinton and George H.W. Bush, followed strict guidelines. They relied on their pardon attorneys to vet each case. For instance, President Biden only pardoned a few people late in his term and discussed them with the Justice Department. Trump’s mass pardons, by contrast, lacked any formal advice or written recommendations.
Political reactions and concerns
Oyer criticizes congressional Republicans for downplaying these problems. Instead of confronting the fallout, they focused on investigating Joe Biden’s earlier pardons. She argues that ignoring the risks of Trump pardons erodes trust in the justice system. Furthermore, she warns that this approach sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents.
Broader impact on the justice system
When clemency becomes purely political, public safety suffers. Citizens may lose faith in fair treatment under the law. Moreover, victims of the original crimes feel overlooked. They see dangerous offenders walk free without real accountability. Finally, prison rehabilitation programs lose their purpose if pardons override their work.
Oyer’s balanced view on pardons
While she criticizes Trump’s reckless use of pardons, Oyer also says that some of Biden’s late-term pardons raised questions. She mentions the president pardoning family members and other associates. Yet she maintains that Trump’s actions, both in number and nature, pose a far greater threat to evenhanded justice.
Calls for reform
To restore trust, many experts suggest reforms:
• Reinstate a mandatory review by the pardon attorney’s office before any large-scale pardons.
• Require detailed written recommendations explaining each pardon decision.
• Create bipartisan oversight or public reporting on clemency actions.
• Limit the number of pardons a president can issue in a single day.
Such measures could help prevent future abuses and ensure public safety remains a top priority.
Looking ahead
As Trump’s second term continues, the nation will likely see more clemency announcements. Each new pardon without merit could spark fresh controversy. Meanwhile, injured communities and law-enforcement groups will monitor recidivism closely. Ultimately, whether Congress or the courts step in may shape the future of presidential clemency.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main danger of mass pardons without review?
Mass pardons skip critical safety checks. They let potentially dangerous people avoid prison time and then reoffend, risking public safety.
How did past presidents handle pardons differently?
Previous presidents relied on the Justice Department’s pardon attorney for background checks and written advice. They issued pardons more selectively and after careful review.
Why are congressional Republicans criticized over these pardons?
They have focused on Trump’s predecessor’s clemency actions instead of addressing the risks from Trump pardons, which Oyer says erodes justice.
Could reforms prevent future clemency abuse?
Yes. Mandatory reviews, detailed reports, oversight panels and limits on daily pardons could ensure a fair, merit-based process and protect public safety.