|9 min read
Trump Pardons 2026: How Presidential Clemency Works
Comprehensive guide to presidential pardons and clemency in 2026 covering how pardons work, the DOJ Office of the Pardon Attorney, commutations vs. pardons, federal vs. state limitations, and historical comparisons.
How Presidential Pardons Work
The presidential pardon power is one of the broadest and most unreviewable authorities granted by the Constitution. Article II, Section 2 gives the president the power to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment" (Constitution Annotated: Article II, Section 2). This means the president can pardon any federal offense, commute any federal sentence, and grant reprieves with almost no procedural requirements and virtually no judicial review of the decision to grant clemency. The framers modeled this power on the English royal prerogative of mercy, recognizing that rigid application of criminal law could produce unjust results in individual cases. Alexander Hamilton defended the pardon power in Federalist No. 74, arguing that "the criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel." The power has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as essentially plenary: it does not require congressional approval, cannot be overridden by legislation, and is not subject to judicial review of the merits of individual grants. This makes the pardon power one of the few truly unilateral presidential authorities in the constitutional framework. For broader context on presidential authority, visit our live tracker and location history pages.
Federal vs. State Limitations
The most important structural limitation on the presidential pardon power is its restriction to federal offenses. The president has no authority over state criminal convictions, which can only be pardoned or commuted by the governor of the relevant state or, in some states, by a clemency board. This distinction matters because many high-profile criminal matters involve parallel state and federal proceedings. A presidential pardon for a federal offense does not affect a state conviction arising from the same underlying conduct, and vice versa. Similarly, the pardon power does not reach civil cases, administrative proceedings, military court-martial convictions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (which have a separate clemency process), or congressional sanctions such as impeachment. The impeachment exception is explicit in the constitutional text and reflects the framers' concern that a president should not be able to pardon officials who were impeached by Congress for abuse of power. Questions have arisen about whether the president can issue a self-pardon, a question that has never been definitively resolved by the courts. A 1974 Office of Legal Counsel memorandum concluded that the president cannot pardon himself under the principle that no one may be a judge in his own case at DOJ: Office of Legal Counsel, but this opinion is advisory rather than legally binding.
DOJ Office of the Pardon Attorney
While the president has unfettered constitutional authority to grant clemency without following any particular process, an administrative review process does exist within the Department of Justice. The Office of the Pardon Attorney, housed within the DOJ, receives and reviews petitions for executive clemency at DOJ: Office of the Pardon Attorney. Petitioners submit detailed applications that include information about their offense, sentence, post-conviction conduct, and reasons for requesting relief. The OPA investigates each petition, often consulting with the sentencing judge, the U.S. Attorney who prosecuted the case, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. After investigation, the Pardon Attorney makes a recommendation to the Deputy Attorney General, who in turn makes a recommendation to the president. The entire process can take months or even years for a single petition. However, the president is under no obligation to use this process at all. Presidents have historically bypassed the OPA to grant clemency directly, particularly for politically sensitive cases or end-of-term grants. The OPA publishes statistics on petitions received, granted, and denied at DOJ: Clemency Statistics, providing a useful baseline for understanding the volume and disposition rate of clemency requests across administrations.
Commutations vs. Pardons: Key Differences
The clemency power encompasses several distinct forms of relief, and the differences between them have important legal consequences for recipients. A full pardon forgives the offense and restores certain civil rights lost as a result of conviction, such as the right to serve on a federal jury, hold federal office, or possess firearms under federal law. However, a pardon does not expunge the conviction from the record, and it does not create a right to expungement in most jurisdictions. A commutation reduces a sentence, either by shortening a prison term or converting a death sentence to life imprisonment, without forgiving the underlying offense. The recipient of a commutation remains a convicted felon with all attendant collateral consequences. A reprieve temporarily postpones the execution of a sentence, typically a death sentence, without altering it. The president may also grant amnesty, which is a blanket pardon extended to a group or class of people rather than to an individual, as Andrew Johnson did for former Confederates after the Civil War. A remission of fine or forfeiture cancels a financial penalty imposed as part of a federal sentence. Understanding these distinctions is essential for evaluating clemency announcements, since commutations and pardons are often conflated in press coverage despite having meaningfully different consequences for the recipient's legal status and rights.
Legal Challenges and Constitutional Boundaries
Although the pardon power is extremely broad, it is not entirely without limits or legal scrutiny. Courts have held that a pardon may include conditions, and that a recipient can choose to decline a pardon. In Burdick v. United States (1915), the Supreme Court held that a pardon carries an "imputation of guilt" and that acceptance of a pardon constitutes an acknowledgment of the offense, though legal scholars continue to debate the contemporary applicability of this principle. Questions about whether a president can issue prospective pardons covering offenses not yet charged arose prominently with Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon in 1974. That pardon was never challenged in court, so the question lacks definitive judicial resolution, though it established a practical precedent that has not been formally repudiated. Conditional pardons have been upheld when the conditions imposed are lawful and related to the purposes of the clemency grant, but courts have struck down conditions that violate other constitutional rights. The most active area of legal debate in recent years concerns whether the pardon power can be used in ways that obstruct justice or undermine ongoing investigations. While no court has imposed this as a judicially enforceable limit, some legal scholars argue that a pardon issued specifically to prevent witness cooperation could constitute an impeachable offense at Supreme Court of the United States. These boundaries remain largely theoretical but are actively discussed.
Historical Comparison Across Administrations
Every modern president has used the clemency power, though patterns vary considerably in volume, process, and political context. Barack Obama granted 1,927 commutations, the most of any president, primarily through a targeted initiative called the Clemency Project 2014, which focused on federal drug offenders serving sentences under since-revised sentencing guidelines. George W. Bush granted 189 pardons and 11 commutations over two terms, a notably restrained pace. Donald Trump's first term from 2017 to 2021 included 237 total clemency grants, many of which bypassed the OPA process and were directed at political allies, media figures, or cases that received significant public attention. Bill Clinton's controversial last-day pardon of Marc Rich in 2001 sparked congressional investigations and a DOJ inspector general review. Historical clemency data is maintained by the Office of the Pardon Attorney at DOJ: Clemency Statistics and by academic researchers. The key metric for comparative analysis is not just total volume but the proportion of grants that went through the formal OPA review process versus those made through direct presidential action without DOJ recommendation. Our location history and news feed pages provide additional context on how clemency announcements correlate with presidential schedules and activity patterns.
Sources and Official Resources
The following primary sources are essential for verifying and tracking presidential clemency actions.
- Constitution Annotated: Article II, Section 2 provides the constitutional basis for the pardon power.
- DOJ: Office of the Pardon Attorney administers the clemency petition process.
- DOJ: Clemency Statistics publishes historical data on petitions received, granted, and denied.
- DOJ: Office of Legal Counsel publishes advisory opinions on the scope of presidential authority.
- Supreme Court of the United States maintains opinions addressing the pardon power.
- Federal Register publishes clemency proclamations.
- Federal Bureau of Prisons implements commutation orders.
- Congress.gov provides legislative context and historical records.
For ongoing updates, visit our live tracker and location history pages.
trump pardons 2026presidential clemencypardon processcommutationDOJ pardon attorney
LT
LocateTrump Research Team
An independent team of developers, data analysts, and researchers tracking presidential location and activity using publicly available information from 10+ major news sources. Operating continuously since January 20, 2025. All content follows our editorial standards for source verification and accuracy.
Related Articles
Trump Executive Orders 2026: Complete List and Tracker
Track every Trump executive order in 2026 with primary-source links to the Federal Register, legal challenge status, and category-by-category breakdown of presidential policy actions.
Trump Cabinet 2026: Key Officials, Roles, and Changes
Complete guide to the Trump Cabinet in 2026 covering the Senate confirmation process, key departments and their roles, acting vs. confirmed officials, Schedule C appointments, and how to track personnel changes.
Further Reading
Need deeper document-level context? Continue with carefully sourced long-form coverage.
Research Pathways for This Topic
Use these targeted internal paths to move from this article into related hubs, timelines, and data-backed tracking pages.
Legal and Courts topic hub
Court filings, appellate process, procedural explainers, and judicial timelines.
Latest update stream
Check the newest verified movement updates tied to current reporting cycles.
Full chronology timeline
Validate claims against the complete event timeline with date-level ordering.
Weekly travel summaries
See week-over-week movement trends and recurring state/event patterns.
Explore LocateTrump
See presidential location data in action with our live tools.