Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jkcerda, Dec 6, 2018.
This will be interesting to see how it plays out.
guy should not have been double charged.
From what I remember double jeopardy prevents multiple prosecutions or punishments by the same “sovereign". i.e....State and Federal are two separate sovereigns.
My take is if the feds wanted the case they should have taken it from jump.. I don't have a problem with him claiming a violation of the 5th but I doubt he will prevail for the reasons stated by Boxer above.....
My next take is that presidential pardons should be abolished if they can't use them sparingly and responsibly, which no president has ever done....
He should have just been prosecuted by the feds and that's it if they were going for the maximum sentence allowed under the law (federal or state). It's not like states attorneys don't hand over cases to the Feds on a weekly basis.
Agree.... And vise-versa.. If the Feds decline then the State could have picked it up...
Also understand that Trump can't pardon anyone until they are convicted, those conviction could take awhile and if he's not in office then it's the next guys call. Pardon power doesn't apply to indictments.
That isn't true. Pardons can only affect past actions, but charges, let alone a conviction, aren't needed. Carter pardoned thousands of people who evaded the Vietnam draft and Nixon was pardoned by Ford.
Exactly. This could also have 10A implications, and limit the states in what they can do with their own judicial system, which in effect is different from the federal system. On paper, these are two separate crimes in two separate jurisdictions, so the 5A has a good chance of not applying.
Would like to see this come out in favor of the defendant.
Feds then State if the Feds decline, not both.
I don't disagree with this, I just don't think it's going to happen...
My mistake, many state Governors cannot. Lumped federal in with state.