[Prokopton]

The power to pardon traditionally belongs to the president.

The power to pardon has nothing to do with "tradition", it is granted exclusively to the president by the Constitution. Hunter, although well intentioned, is attempting to do something that is clearly unconstitutional. It would be better if he proposed a "sense of the House" proclamation.

Article 2 - The Executive Branch

Section 2 - Civilian Power Over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President .... shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

[Bonaparte]

But would Congress be granting a pardon with this bill or merely proposing one? Afterall, no grant of pardon occurs without the President's signature. This bill looks like a way to give Bush political cover. I think he wants to help these border patrol agents.

[monocle]

The power to grant pardons does not appear to be exclusive, but I think it would set a bad precedent. Can one imagine Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary or Maxine Waters using such power?

[Eagle Eye]

Hunter isn’t attempting to pardon the agents he is attempting to get a pardon in front of the President. Nothing unConstitutional there.

[philetus]

The power to pardon has nothing to do with “tradition”, it is granted exclusively to the president by the Constitution.”

The President pardons drug dealers and leaves Ramos and Compean in prison.

If it needs Bush’s signature to become a pardon, I can’t see where Hunter is doing anything unconstitutional.

Maybe it’s what Bush needs, so he can pardon them without seeming to like it.

[John Leland 1789]

Are you sure, though, that Article 2, Section 2 FORBIDS Congress from redressing this injustice in this way?

[FortWorthPatriot]

"...except in Cases of Impeachment."

So Slick will never be pardoned? Cool.