As a young woman growing up in the third century, Rachel Gallus has access to all the attractions and excess Rome has to offer: the games at the Coliseum, vivacious friends, and slaves to attend to her every whim. Yet questions haunt her thoughts"questions of human justice, of purpose in life, and of her own identity. After viewing a particularly striking martyrdom in the Coliseum, Rachel finds herself in a surprising set of circumstances, bringing her face to face with her own gripping desires and deepest sorrows. As she learns about the faith of the Christians, she is astonished at the price they pay for their beliefs. But she cannot forget what she has seen and heard. Join Rachel as she battles tenaciously through her anger, questions, and fears until she can accept pardon's price.

Forced back into the working world after her lawyer husband's downfall, Helen discovers a talent for public relations and is tempted away from her dysfunctional family by her childhood crush, who needs her professional assistance.

Until President Gerald Ford pardoned former president Richard Nixon for the Watergate scandal, most members of the public probably paid little attention to the president's use of the clemency power. Ford's highly controversial pardon of Nixon, however, ignited such a firestorm of protest that, fairly or unfairly, it may have cost him the presidency in 1976. Ever since, presidential pardons have been the subject of increased scrutiny and the focus of news media with a voracious appetite for scandal. This first book-length treatment of presidential pardons in twenty years updates the clemency controversy to consider its more recent uses-or misuses. Blending history, law, and politics into a seamless narrative, Jeffrey Crouch provides a close look at the application and scrutiny of this power. His book is a virtual primer on the subject, covering all facets from its background in English law to current applications. Crouch considers the framers' vision of how clemency would fit into the separation of powers as an "act of grace" or a check on injustice, then explains how the president and Congress have struggled for supremacy over the pardon power, with the Supreme Court generally deferring to the executive branch's desire for its broadest possible application. Before the modern era, presidents rarely interfered in the justice system to protect aides from prosecution, and Crouch examines some of the more controversial pardons in our history, from the Whiskey rebels to Jimmy Hoffa. In the wake of Watergate, he shows, the use of presidential pardons has become more controversial. Crouch assesses whether independent counsel investigations and special prosecutors have prompted the executive to use the pardon as a weapon in interbranch political warfare. He argues that the clemency power has been misused by recent presidents, who have used it to protect themselves or their subordinates, or to reward supporters. And although he concedes that Ford's pardon of Nixon reflected the framers' concerns about preserving government in a time of crisis, he argues that more recent cases involving the Iran-Contra conspirators, commodities trader Marc Rich, and vice-presidential chief-of-staff "Scooter" Libby have demonstrated a disturbing misapplication of power. In fleshing out these misuses of clemency, Crouch weighs the pros and cons of proposed amendments to the pardon power, one of the few powers that are virtually unlimited in the Constitution. The Presidential Pardon Power takes up a key issue in debates over the imperial presidency and urges that public and scholars alike pay closer attention to a dangerous trend.

This book is the first comprehensive study of how presidential mass pardons have helped put domestic insurrections to rest. Graham G. Dodds examines when and why presidents have issued mass pardons and amnesties to deal with domestic rebellion and attempt to reunite the country.

The President of the United States and the Governor of each state are empowered to grant pardons and commutations. A pardon can eliminate the collateral consequences of a conviction. A commutation can reduce the length of a sentence. In general, a pardon is sought after release from prison. A commutation, on the other hand, is used by prisoners to lessen their sentence.This easy to read guidebook is designed to assist individuals who want to apply for a pardon or commutation of sentence. The guidebook gives practical information about the process for applying for clemency, what to include in your petition, and provides answers about executive clemency in general.The guidebook is a "must have" for any individual who wants to navigate the complex process of applying for a pardon or commutation of sentence.

Each Thanksgiving, the president of the United States symbolically pardons one turkey from the fate of serving as a holiday dinner. In this pamphlet, anthropologist Magnus Fiskesjö uncovers the hidden horrors of such rituals connected with the power of pardon, from the annual turkey to the pardoning of the original Teddy Bear. It is through these ritualized and perpetually remembered acts of mercy, Fiskesjö contends, that we might come to understand the exceptional--and troubling--status of the War on Terror prisoners being held by the United States at Guantánamo Bay. In The Thanksgiving Turkey Pardon, Swedish anthropologist Magnus Fiskesjö, see in the annual presidential reprieve of an otherwise doomed turkey something much more than a lark. (Just ask a vegetarian; it's no joke.) 'It is really a symbolic pardoning act which, through public performance, establishes and manifests the sovereign's position at the helm of the state by highlighting . . . his power to control matters of life and death.' That observation leads Fiskesjö to some troubling thoughts on the exercise of U.S. sovereignty, from Teddy Roosevelt's big-stick era to the holding of prisoners at Guantánamo.--Jennifer Howard, Washington Post Book World

Nearly every country in the world has a mechanism for executive clemency, which, though residual in most legal systems, serves as a vital due process safeguard and as an outlet for leniency in punishment. While the origins of clemency lie in the historical prerogative powers of once-absolute rulers, modern clemency laws and practices have evolved to be enormously varied. This volume brings comparative and empirical analysis to bear on executive clemency, building a sociological and political context around systematically-collected data on clemency laws, grants, and decision-making. Some jurisdictions have elaborate constitutional and legal structures for pardoning or commuting a sentence while virtually never doing so, while others have little formal process and yet grant clemency frequently. Using examples from Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Caribbean, and the USA, this comparative analysis of the law and the practice of clemency sheds light on a frequently misunderstood executive power. This book builds on existing academic scholarship and expands the limited geographical scope of prior research, which has tended to focus on North America, the UK, and Australia. It relays the latest state of knowledge on the topic and employs case studies, doctrinal legal analysis, historical research, and statements by clemency decision-making authorities, in explaining why clemency varies so considerably across global legal and political systems. In addition, it includes contributions encompassing international law, transitional justice, and innocence and wrongful convictions, as well as on jurisdictions that are historically under-researched. The book will be of value to practitioners, academics, and students interested in the fields of human rights, criminal law, comparative criminal justice, and international relations.

The captivating account of how Clint Lorance, a soldier who became a scapegoat for a corrupt military hierarchy, was falsely charged with war crimes, imprisoned, and eventually pardoned by President Trump. While out on patrol in Afghanistan, Clint Lorance learned that two men, both suspected suicide bombers, were speeding toward a crowded city on motorcycles. Lorance couldn't see them, but his men on the ground had clear shots. After a split second, he gave the order to shoot, killing both men. In the months that followed, Lorance was arrested by the military and put on trial for war crimes. Prosecutors claimed that the order he gave constituted an act of premeditated murder, and they sentenced him to twenty years in prison. In Stolen Honor, Lorance finally tells the story of this event and the trial it led to -- how the prosecutors declined to admit clear-cut evidence that would have exonerated him, how the men in his unit turned on him, and why he still believes he was right to give the order to shoot. It is a story that stretches from small-town America to the deserts of Afghanistan, from the White House to the tiny jail cell where Lorance spent six years waiting on his exoneration, which finally came when President Trump pardoned him in 2019. The book also discusses Lorance's plans to attend law school and help reform the broken military justice system.

In Rebel Salvation, Kathleen Zebley Liulevicius examines pardon petitions from former Confederate soldiers and sympathizers in Tennessee to craft a unique and comprehensive analysis of the process of Reconstruction in the Volunteer State after the Civil War. These underutilized petitions contain a wealth of information about Tennesseans from an array of social and economic backgrounds, and include details about many residents who would otherwise not appear in the historical record. They reveal the dynamics at work between multiple factions in the state: former Rebels, Unionists, Governor William G. Brownlow, and the U.S. Army officers responsible for ushering Tennessee back into the Union. The pardons also illuminate the reality of the politically and emotionally charged post–Civil War environment, where everyone—from wealthy elites to impoverished sharecroppers—who had fought, supported, or expressed sympathy for the Confederacy was required by law to sue for pardon to reclaim certain privileges. All such requests arrived at the desk of President Andrew Johnson, who ultimately determined which petitioners regained the right to vote, hold office, practice law, operate a business, and buy and sell land. Those individuals filing petitions experienced Reconstruction in personal and profound ways. Supplicants wrote and circulated their exoneration documents among loyalist neighbors, friends, and Union officers to obtain favorable endorsements that might persuade Brownlow and Johnson to grant pardon. Former Rebels relayed narratives about the motivating factors compelling them to side with the Confederacy, chronicled their actions during the war, expressed repentance, and pledged allegiance to the United States government and the Constitution. Although not required, many petitioners even sought recommendations from their former wartime foes. The pardoning of former Confederates proved a collaborative process in which neighbors, acquaintances, and erstwhile enemies lodged formal pleas to grant or deny clemency from state and federal officials. Indeed, as Rebel Salvation reveals, the long road to peace began here in the newly reunited communities of postwar Tennessee.

The theory of the unitary executive is one of the most controversial and significant constitutional doctrines of the past several decades. It holds that the U.S. president alone embodies all executive power and therefore has unlimited ability to direct the many people and institutions within the federal government’s vast executive branch. It thus justifies the president’s prerogative to organize the executive branch and to direct its activities, to tell executive personnel what to do and to fire them if desired, to control the flow of information, and to issue signing statements that make judgments about constitutionality and determine the extent to which laws will be implemented. In some versions, it also endorses implied or inherent powers and permits the president to completely control foreign policy and military action. Proponents say this conception of the presidential office is faithful to the Constitution, facilitates the sort of energetic executive that Alexander Hamilton argued for, and enhances administrative efficacy and political accountability for governance. Critics say this arrangement is constitutionally inaccurate, is belied by historical practice and legal precedents, and is dangerously close to the monarchical power that provoked the American Revolution – and can be especially threatening in the era of Donald Trump. This book examines how controversies about unitary executive power have played out from the founding era to the present day with a focus on recent presidents, it explores arguments both for and against the unitary executive theory, and it looks ahead to future implications for American politics.