With Donald Trump again president-elect, and Linda McMahon working on his transition team and expected to head the Department of Commerce, wrestling media has broadly speculated that a pardon for Vince McMahon is likely to occur.
Trump has the power to pardon McMahon, even though he hasn’t been formally charged or indicted in a federal sexual assault, rape and sex trafficking investigation that’s been ongoing for over a year, and despite the conflict of interest in Trump’s relationship with McMahon which has last 40 years and McMahon’s wife Linda being a former Small Business Administration head in Trump’s last administration.
What Trump can’t do is pardon McMahon from any civil court proceedings, such as the lawsuit filed against him by Janel Grant, or any state or local criminal proceedings. This would include the civil action filed against him, Linda McMahon and TKO in Maryland last month by four survivors of the WWF Ring Boy scandal.
Why can presidents pardon convicted criminals or those charged with federal crimes?
Presidents receive pardon powers directly from the U.S. Constitution. In Article II, Section II, the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.“
Pardon power dates back to English common law of mercy, when royalty could pardon certain people sentenced for crimes.
Presidents can pardon people who have been convicted or are facing federal criminal charges. This is where McMahon enters the picture since he’s being investigated by the FBI and a federal grand jury in Manhattan for sex crimes.
Trump could also commute McMahon’s sentence if he’s indeed indicted by a federal grand jury and is found guilty in court.
Trump and his previous pardons
Pardons are inherently political and many are controversial.
The most notable pardon in U.S. history, President Gerald Ford pardoned former President Richard Nixon early in his term. Nixon had resigned following the Watergate scandal and was replaced by Ford, the sitting Vice President.
Ford felt it best to pardon Nixon and not put the country through the trial of a recent president. The pardon and a rough debate performance (Warsaw was in fact, not happy with the Soviet occupation of Poland, Mr. Ford) were key factors in his loss to Jimmy Carter, showing the political damage a pardon could have on the president.
Some pardons seek to give justice to those who were denied it. This was the case when Trump pardoned Jack Johnson. Johnson became the first African-American world heavyweight boxing champion during the height of Jim Crowe in the early 1900s. He was convicted by an all-white jury in 1913 for violating the Mann Act when he was traveling with his white girlfriend between states, violating a law that forbid traveling with women across states with the intent of “immoral purposes.”
Trump, a boxing fan, had pardoned Johnson with support of actor Sylvester Stallone and after decades of outcry from Civil Rights activitists. The pardoned occurred over 100 years after his conviction.
Other Trump pardons included people convicted of various drug offenses.
Charles Kushner, a slumlord and father of Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, was sentenced to 24 months in prison in what then U.S. Attorney General Chris Christie called “one of the most disgusting crimes he had ever prosecuted. Kushhner was convicted after he lured his brother-in-law (who was informing on Kushner to the FBI in a tax-evasion case) to a hotel, hired a prostitute to lure him into sex and recording it in hopes of using it as leverage on his brother-in-law.
Trump saved most of his pardons for his inner circle of political operatives – Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn had been charged or convicted of various crimes involving acting as international agents or other acts that benefited his campaign. He pardoned the four as he left office with little to no backing to show they deserved being pardoned. All four continue to be involved in his political operations and are part of his inner-circle, unlike the McMahons.
Can Trump pardon Vince McMahon?
Yes, and no.
Trump could pardon McMahon from the criminal investigation he’s facing in the Southern District of New York.
Trump cannont pardon McMahon in any state or local criminal cases or from any civil federal cases, like the Janel Grant suit. The Grant suit is currently on a stay at the request of federal investigators. The stay is scheduled to end on Dec. 11.
Trump cannot pardon businesses or companies. If World Wrestling Entertainment, TKO or any other company were to be charged in a criminal action, Trump couldn’t pardon the company.
He also can’t pardon anyone who has been impeached.
McMahon pardon could be risky for Trump
Whether Trump does pardon Vince, the potential fallout from public opinion could be a major factor. Manafort, Bannon, Stone and Flynn were highly controversial figures, but they aren’t accused of anything as seriuos as McMahon. According to the Wall Street Journal, McMahon is being investigated for sex trafficking, rape and sex assault. Public opinion is powerful and a pardon of McMahon would be extremely controversial, morseso than someone who commited white collar crimes or something related to the election.
The risk is real. President Bill Clinton pardoned former Wall Street wonderboy Mark Rich during his final day in office. Rich was charged with 51 counts of tax fraud along with numerous other crimes when he fled prosecution and flew to Switzerland. Rich’s ex-wife had been a large donor to Clinton’s campaign and his presidential library. The pardon beame the most controversial since Nixon’s.
The pardon was heavily criticized by media and politicians in both parties, including President Jimmy Carter, former Clinton associate Terry McAulife and former Clinton campaign manager James Carville. Brookings called the Rich pardon “the final outrage.” Rich and other pardons on Clinton’s last day in office were referred to later as “Pardongate.”
Clinton was investigated for the Rich pardon to see if there was evidence he had been “bought off” by Rich’s ex-wife, but investigators concluded this wasn’t the case.
Case law history on Presidential pardon powers, Congressional legislation and the separation of powers
The interpretation of presidential pardon power is known as “plenary,” meaning broad. Trump has much sway with how he issues pardons, but he’s limited to federal criminal cases.
Presidential pardons have been revoked – twice. The first occurred in 1869 when outgoing President Johnson issued a pardon (ironically, a case handled in the Southern District of New York, where Trump was convicted on 34 felony charges last year and the same court investigating McMahon) which wasn’t completed when he left office. Incoming President U.S. Grant revoked the pardon once he came into office.
President George W. Bush revoked his own pardon in 2008. Bush pardoned Issac Toussie, a New York property and real estate developer who was convicted of mail fraud and making false statements to a government agency. After the pardon, the Bush administration learned Toussie’s father made a $38,000 donation to the Republican party. After outcry from the media, the pardon – which had been issued but not completed – was revoked by Bush himself.
It’s unlikely the Supreme Court would take action to limit Trump’s pardon power after it ruled earlier this year that Trump had “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecutions after he was out of office for actions he took while in the office of the President. The current court, which ended Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs decision, has taken a broad view on presidential power in other cases.
This doesn’t mean Trump couldn’t face an investigation if there were public pressure and if the circumstnaces around the pardon called for it. The Mark Rich pardon was the case of a president being suspected of being paid for a presidential pardon. He was ultimately cleared.
Two Supreme Court cases set the broad power standard of the presidential pardon – both date to the post-Civil War era and the Andrew Johnson administration.
Ex Parte Garland, an 1866 case, a federal law passed by the US after the Civil War required a loyalty oath from any federal court officer stating they had never served with the Confederacy.
Augustus Garland challenged the law after he received a pardon from President Andrew Johnson, who succeeded President Abraham Lincoln. The ruling stated the loyalty oath law was unconstitutional in a 5-4 decision. The ruling’s legacy established the president’s pardon power could occur anytime after a crime had occurred.
The other key case was U.S. v. Klein in 1871. In 1870, Congress prohibited the president from using a pardon to allow a former member of the Confederacy to claim proceeds from having their property or estate sold. Klein went to court after the death of a relative, asking for the proceeds from the estate. The Supreme Court ruled Congress had no right to limit the president’s pardon powers and violated the Separation of Powers between the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches.
