This is new to me. Can any FReeper confirm this?
Pardons are not Executive Orders, and thus can’t be undone. I’m not sure what the Daily Mail reporter is smoking.
If a pardon is granted, and the autopen was used to sign it, there must be official documentation of the approval to use the autopen that has the President’s instructions documented, and that includes pardons and Executive Orders.
That is what I have been told.
Obviously, this is common sense. Otherwise, the autopen could be used for any purpose at all...by anyone with access to the autopen.
There are people on this very forum who think that the autopen usage by someone appointed by the President (such as Biden’s White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients) is the same as Thomas Becket being appointed Lord Chancellor by the King of England in the 12th Century and given the Seal of England which authorized him to make any decision on behalf of, or in the absence or incapacitation of the King, no questions asked.
Does anyone really think that would have been an acceptable practice to the Founders? (apparently the answer is “yes”, given some of the responses to this issue on this forum)
A presidential pardon issued by a U.S. President cannot be revoked by a subsequent President (or by anyone else, including Congress or the courts).Key reasons and supporting evidence:
1. Constitutional authority is unilateral and final
The pardon power comes from Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution:
“[The President] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
Once a pardon is delivered and accepted, it is an exercised executive act that becomes irrevocable. This has been the consistent understanding since the earliest days of the republic.
2. Supreme Court precedent
• Ex parte Garland (1866): The Court described a pardon as “a deed, to the validity of which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without acceptance… It is a constituent part of the judicial system… Its effect is to relieve the offender from the consequences of the offense.” Once delivered and accepted, it is final.
• Biddle v. Perovich (1927): The Court ruled that the pardon power is “not subject to legislative control” and that a pardon, once granted, “cannot be annulled or withdrawn by a succeeding President.”
• Schick v. Reed (1974): Reaffirmed that the pardon power is “unlimited” except by the two constitutional exceptions (impeachment and state crimes), and once exercised it is complete.
3. Historical practice
No President has ever successfully revoked a valid pardon issued by a predecessor. Attempts or suggestions to do so (e.g., criticism of Ford’s pardon of Nixon, Trump’s pardons, or Biden’s pardons) have never resulted in legal revocation. Even controversial pardons (Andrew Johnson’s pardons of Confederate officials, Carter’s draft-evader pardon, Clinton’s Marc Rich pardon) remain in force regardless of later presidents’ opinions.
4. The only theoretical limitations or “revocation” scenarios
• If a pardon was obtained by fraud or bribery and that fact is proven in court, some scholars argue a court could potentially declare it void (this has never happened and is untested).
• A pardon that was never actually delivered or accepted before the president left office can lapse (see Ex parte Garland and the later “midnight pardons” cases).
• Self-pardons, if ever issued and challenged, might be treated differently, but that question remains unresolved.