Can someone pardoned by president vote again? Can they run for office? What it means
The president's pardons also include reality television stars Todd and Julie Chrisley, who were found guilty of conspiring to defraud community banks in Atlanta out of more than $36 million, and rapper NBA YoungBoy, who pleaded guilty to a federal gun charge in 2024.
So, what is a presidential pardon? Can those pardoned vote? Can they run for office? Here's what to know.
The president's clemency powers, or the ability to forgive Americans of crimes, is defined in the Constitution, which says presidents can "grant reprieves and pardons" for offenses against the U.S. The only offense the president cannot pardon is impeachment.
The presidential pardon, or full pardon, is the most well-known forgiveness. It absolves a person of wrongdoing and restores any civil rights lost "without qualification."
A pardon often implies that the convicted person has taken responsibility for their actions and is forgiven by the president. It can restore some civil abilities that would otherwise be barred due to the criminal conviction, according to the Department of Justice.
A pardon is merely an expression of the president's forgiveness and "does not signify innocence," according to the DOJ. Pardons can, however, help eliminate some of the consequences of conviction and restore a person's civil rights.
The DOJ states the offense is not removed from a person's criminal record after being pardoned. Instead, the conviction and pardon both appear on the record.
Pardons can help those previously convicted obtain licenses, bonding or employment.
An individual seeking a pardon must submit a formal application to the Office of the Pardon Attorney. In evaluating the merit of each request, the Office of the Pardon Attorney considers several factors, such as a person's conduct following conviction, the seriousness of the offense and the extent to which the individual has accepted responsibility for the crime, according to Chicago-based law firm MoloLamken LLP.
Prosecutors who handled the case and the deputy attorney general (the second most senior official at the DOJ) may weigh in on the recommendation about whether to grant a pardon.
The president, however, can bypass the pardon attorney and grant a pardon in the absence of any such application or recommendation from the DOJ.
Yes. Since the pardon represents legal forgiveness, it ends any further punishment and restores the convicted person's rights, such as being able to vote.
Yes. Just like voting, convicted persons pardoned by the president can run for public office.
Yes. In fact, a presidential pardon is the only way a person convicted of a federal felony offense may obtain a firearm, according to the DOJ.
There are no limits to how many people the president may pardon.
America's first president, George Washington, made the first presidential pardon. He used the promise of a pardon to stop a group of farmers and distillers from Pennsylvania's violent protests of the federal government's ban on whiskey and other liquor, which later came to be known as the Whiskey Rebellion.
Other historic pardons include former President Richard Nixon's pardon by his vice president, Gerald Ford, who took over the Oval Office when Nixon resigned in the wake of the Watergate scandal, and former President Bill Clinton's pardon of his brother, Roger, who was convicted on drug charges.
Presidential pardons peaked during former President Franklin Roosevelt's time in office. During his four terms, Roosevelt granted 2,819 pardons, many of which were wartime offenses from World War I. He also commuted 488 prison sentences and remitted 477 fines, according to the DOJ archives.
Former President Joe Biden granted more acts of clemency than any previous chief executive, according to the Pew Research Center. During his tenure as president, Biden granted 4,245 acts of clemency (80 pardons and 4,165 commutations).
Former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who served 13 years in office, issued the second-most clemency acts with 3,796 (2,819 pardons and 488 commutations).
During Trump's first presidential term, he granted 238 acts of clemency, which consisted of 143 pardons and 94 commutations, according to the Pew Research Center.
USA TODAY reporters Kinsey Crowley and Ella Lee contributed to this report.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Can someone pardoned by president vote again? Can they run for office?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
16 minutes ago
- CNN
Over 200 rallies are expected across the country to protest Trump-led redistricting plans
Donald Trump Congressional newsFacebookTweetLink Follow At parks, coffee shops, churches and government buildings around the country, hundreds of people are expected to gather today with a simple message: 'Stop the Trump takeover.' The rallies are a bid to combat Republican-led plans to redraw congressional maps. The main event will take place in Texas, where a new congressional map backed by President Donald Trump that could net Republicans five additional seats in the 2026 midterm elections inspired the state's Democratic lawmakers to flee the state – preventing the quorum needed to vote. 'Trump is terrified of the American people,' said the Texas for All Coalition, which is helping organize the events, in a news release. 'He knows he can't win on his ideas, so he's trying to take Congress by hook or by crook – and he's doing it by silencing the voices of communities of color. We're not going to let that happen.' Organizers emphasized 'a commitment to nonviolence' at all events in event page descriptions. Over 200 events are planned in 34 states, according to the event's official website. The Democratic National Committee is helping organize events, it announced in a news release. 'From coast to coast, people will be showing up at their statehouses, city halls, and community spaces to make it clear – we see what Trump is doing, and we won't stand for it,' said the DNC. A swath of nonprofits and other organizations are also supporting the effort, including Planned Parenthood, the Working Families Party and Human Rights Campaign. Trump described the proposed Texas congressional map as a 'very simple redrawing' at the White House. 'We pick up five seats,' he added. But it doesn't end with Texas. Republican leaders in other states, too, have proposed changing their congressional maps ahead of next year's midterms. The White House is pushing Missouri legislators to consider a special session to redraw maps. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has floated the idea of changing his state's maps, and has said he thinks the Trump administration should give the state another seat. In Ohio, maps must be redrawn due to a quirk of state law – which may make the state's delegation even more Republican and carve up two Democratic seats, according to a report in June from CNN's Fredreka Schouten. Democratic lawmakers have announced their own plans to fight back, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who kicked off his own redistricting push on Thursday. Here's more on what we know about today's protests. Today's largest protest is slated to happen in Austin, Texas. Over 1,000 people have RSVPed for the event, which will start at the state's Capitol. 'Texas is being used as a testing ground for extremist policies and partisan games that don't reflect our values,' reads the event page. 'Thousands of Texans have shown up against the racially gerrymandered congressional map lawmakers are trying to force through in order to weaken the voting power of communities of color.' Former Congressman Beto O'Rourke, United Farm Workers cofounder Dolores Huerta, Democratic US Rep. Greg Casar and Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas are expected to speak, according to a news release from the Texas for All Coalition. Drag queen Brigitte Bandit and singer Gina Chavez are also expected to perform. Across Texas, events are also planned in Houston, Dallas, San Angelo, Tyler, McAllen, Conroe and Kingwood. Events and rallies are also scheduled in dozens of other states, both in Democratic strongholds and Republican-majority states. Local organizers are planning each city-specific event. In New York City, demonstrators are expected to gather in Central Park. In Washington, DC, where Trump has deployed the National Guard and declared a federal takeover of the local police department, organizers are painting banners and signs to place around the city. Protesters in Raleigh and Durham, North Carolina, plan to hold a 'bridge brigade,' holding signs on 16 different bridges. Demonstrations are also planned in Cincinnati, Ohio; Sarasota, Florida; and Jefferson City, Missouri, among other cities. The planned events include rallies, teach-ins, banner drops and art-making at locations that include a bookstore in Jacksonville, Florida, and a Tesla showroom in Palo Alto, California. The demonstrations follow a string of other protests organized since Trump took office for the second time in January, including the 'No Kings' protests in June and demonstrations against the president's deportation campaign in July. Drucilla Tigner, the executive director of statewide coalition Texas For All, said in a news release that the fight extends far past Texas. 'Across Texas, and across the country, communities are speaking out in a united voice to call for an end to the Trump takeover,' she said. 'Though this fight started in Texas, it doesn't end here. This isn't just about redistricting or one state's politics.' 'It's about the future of our democracy.'
32 minutes ago
Some workers would be excluded from student loan forgiveness program for 'illegal' activity
WASHINGTON -- Teachers, social workers, nurses and other public workers would be cut off from a popular student loan cancellation program if the Trump administration finds their employer engaged in activities with a 'substantial illegal purpose,' under a new federal proposal released on Friday. The Education Department took aim at nonprofits or government bodies that work with immigrants and transgender youth, releasing plans to overhaul the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Opponents fear the new policy would turn the loan forgiveness benefit into a tool of political retribution. The proposal would give the education secretary the final say in deciding whether a group or government entity should be excluded from the program, which was created by Congress in 2007 to encourage more college graduates to enter lower-paying public service fields. The proposal says illegal activity includes the trafficking or 'chemical castration' of children, illegal immigration and supporting foreign terrorist organizations. 'Chemical castration' is defined as using hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty — gender-affirming care common for transgender children or teens. President Donald Trump ordered the changes in March, saying the loan forgiveness program was steering taxpayer money to 'activist organizations' that pose a threat to national security and do not serve the public. The public will be given 30 days to weigh in on the proposal before it can be finalized. Any changes would take effect in July 2026. Under current rules, government employees and many nonprofit workers can get their federal student loans canceled after they've made 10 years of payments. The program is open to government workers, including teachers, firefighters and employees of public hospitals, along with nonprofits that focus on certain areas. The new proposal would exclude employees of any organization tied to an activity deemed illegal. The Education Department predicts that fewer than 10 organizations would be deemed ineligible per year. It doesn't expect a 'significant reduction' in the percentage of borrowers who would be granted forgiveness under the program, according to the proposal. Yet the agency acknowledges that not all industries would be affected evenly. Schools, universities, health care providers, social workers and legal services organizations are among those most likely to have their eligibility jeopardized, the department wrote. It did not give more specifics about what 'illegal' actions those groups were taking that could bar them from the program. But the proposal suggests that performing gender-affirming care in the 27 states that outlaw it would be enough. If a state or federal court rules against an employer, that could lead to its expulsion from the program, or if the employer is involved in a legal settlement that includes an admission of wrongdoing. Even without a legal finding, however, the education secretary could determine independently that an organization should be ejected. The secretary could judge whether an organization participated in illegal activity by using a legal standard known as the 'preponderance of the evidence' — meaning it's more likely than not that an accusation is true. Once an organization is barred from the program, its workers' future loan payments would no longer count toward cancellation. They would have to find work at another eligible employer to keep making progress toward forgiveness. A ban from the Education Department would last 10 years or until the employer completed a 'corrective action plan' approved by the secretary. Critics blasted the proposal as an illegal attempt to weaponize student loan cancellation. Kristin McGuire, CEO of the nonprofit Young Invincibles, which advocates for loan forgiveness, called it a political stunt designed to confuse borrowers. 'By using a distorted and overly broad definition of 'illegal activities,' the Trump administration is exploiting the student loan system to attack political opponents,' McGuire said in a statement. The Education Department sketched out its plans for the overhaul during a federal rulemaking process that began in June. The agency gathered a panel of experts to help hash out the details — a process known as negotiated rulemaking. But the panel failed to reach a consensus, which freed the department to move forward with a proposal of its own design. The proposal released on Friday included some changes meant to ease concerns raised by the expert panel. Some had worried the department would ban organizations merely for supporting transgender rights, even if they have no direct involvement in gender-affirming care. The new proposal clarifies that the secretary would not expel organizations for exercising their First Amendment rights. ___
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Next time in Moscow?': Five takeaways after Trump and Putin's Alaska summit
Putin welcomed back on world stage with red carpet When President Vladimir Putin landed back onto the world stage on Friday, the skies in Alaska were cloudy. Waiting with a red carpet spread across the tarmac of the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson was US President Donald Trump. As Putin approached, Trump clapped. The two leaders warmly shook hands and smiled. It was a remarkable moment for Putin – a leader who most Western nations have shunned since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. His international travel has since been largely limited to nations friendly to the Russian Federation, such as North Korea and Belarus. The fact that the Alaska summit happened at all was a victory for Putin. But this welcome would have surpassed the Kremlin's wildest dreams. In a short six months Putin went from being a pariah in the eyes of the West to being welcomed on US soil like a partner and friend. To cap it off, in an apparently unscripted moment, Putin decided to accept a lift to the airbase in Trump's armoured limousine instead of driving in his own Moscow-plated presidential state car. As the vehicle pulled away, the cameras zoomed in on Putin, sitting in the backseat and laughing. Putin faced with questions he never gets asked In his 25 years as Russian president, Putin has achieved complete control over the media, crushing journalistic freedoms and replacing information with propaganda. Within Russia he doesn't often – if ever – come up against unfriendly reporters. Yet it was only minutes after landing in Alaska that one journalist shouted in his direction: "Will you stop killing civilians?" If the question bothered him, he didn't show it, appearing instead to shrug and diverting his gaze. During a brief and somewhat chaotic photo op, more questions were shouted, including one in Russian about whether Putin would be ready to meet President Zelensky for a trilateral summit. Again, there was no obvious reaction from the Russian president beyond a cryptic smirk. LIVE UPDATES: Trump says no deal but 'progress made' after Ukraine talks with Putin ANALYSIS: No ceasefire, no deal. What summit means for Trump, Putin and Ukraine WATCH: How the Trump-Putin summit unfolded in 82 seconds VISUALS: The war-ravaged Ukrainian territories in maps VERIFY: Russian attacks on Ukraine double since Trump inauguration What was said when talks ended earlier than expected The world's media gathered in the room with Putin and Trump had been led to expect a press conference; instead, the two leaders gave statements and took no questions from reporters. Unusually, Putin was the first to speak. He praised the "constructive atmosphere of mutual respect" of the "neighbourly" talks, and then launching into a condensed history of Alaska's past as a Russian territory. As Putin spoke, Trump stood in silence. It was several minutes before the Russian president mentioned what he called the "situation in Ukraine" – ostensibly the catalyst for the summit. When he did, it was to state that although an unspecified "agreement" had been reached, the "root causes" of the conflict had to be eliminated before peace could be achieved. The phrase will have set off alarm bells in Kyiv and beyond. Since the start of the war it has become shorthand for a series of intractable and maximalist demands that Putin say stand in the way of a ceasefire. They include recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Ukrainian regions of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson as well as Ukraine agreeing to demilitarisation, neutrality, no foreign military involvement and new elections. Essentially, they amount to capitulation – unacceptable to Kyiv, but clearly – even after three and a half years of bloody conflict – still paramount to Moscow. With this, it was clear that there was no deal. And what was not said Extraordinarily – given the context and the premise for the summit – when it was Trump's turn to speak he did not mention Ukraine or the possibility of a ceasefire once. The closest he came to referencing the conflict was saying that "five, six, seven thousand people a week" are killed and noting that Putin too wanted to see an end to the bloodshed. The usually loquacious Trump seemed to have less to say than Putin. His statement was notable for its relative, and unusual, brevity – but primarily for its vagueness. "There were many, many points that we agreed on," Trump said, adding that "great progress" had been made in an "extremely productive meeting". But he did not share any details and it did not appear that any concrete steps taken towards a resolution of the Ukrainian conflict. No major agreements or a trilateral meeting with President Zelensky were announced. And – to Moscow's relief – there was no mention of any "severe consequences" that Trump threatened would follow if a ceasefire wasn't reached. "We didn't get there," Trump admitted. Then, optimistically though vaguely, he added: "But we have a very good chance of getting there." 'Next time in Moscow' - Putin makes rare aside in English The summit may have failed to yield any tangible progress towards peace in Ukraine, but it cemented the rapprochement between Russia and the US. Pictures of the two presidents repeatedly shaking hands and grinning travelled far and wide on social media – as did images of American servicemen kneeling as they rolled out the red carpet at the foot of Putin's plane. Before wrapping up his statement, Putin referenced one of the US president's frequent talking points – that the conflict in Ukraine would have never started had Trump been in power. Despite Trump's assertion of "great progress", nothing of substance was unveiled at the Alaska summit – yet the two leaders left the door open for another meeting, this time on Russian soil. "I'll probably see you again very soon," Trump said. Rounding off a joint statement where he had to make no promises, no concessions and no compromises, Putin may have felt at ease enough to break into English – a rare occurrence. Chuckling, he looked at Trump and said: "Next time in Moscow." "Oh, that's an interesting one," Trump said. "I'll get a little heat on that one, but I – I could see it possibly happening."
