I Was Not Happy About Trump's Pardon of Joe Arpaio, But This Court Challenge Seems Nuts
I can only guess that the article does a poor job of describing the plaintiffs' argument. Because the argument that the pardon power impinges on the separation of powers, presumably because it voids a judicial ruling, would be true of any pardon in all of history. The Constitution seems to be pretty open-ended in granting this power. As much as it is heartening to see Democratic Congresspersons suddenly develop a concern about Constitutional limits on government power, this seems like a big waste of time and money.
A slate of congressional Democrats is asking a federal judge to invalidate former Sheriff Joe Arpaio's presidential pardon and move forward with sentencing.
Attorneys for 33 members of the U.S. House of Representatives aired their concerns in a "friend of the court" brief filed in federal court on Wednesday morning.
The brief argued that U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton should toss President Donald Trump's pardon of Arpaio, 85, in the interest of protecting the government's division of powers.
"The presidential pardon upon which that motion is based is an encroachment by the Executive on the independence of the Judiciary," the document stated. "The amici urge the Court to defend jealously against that encroachment as the framers intended."
