| Line 60: |
Line 60: |
| | == Other Federal Court decisions == | | == Other Federal Court decisions == |
| | In United States v. Noonan, 906 F.2d 952 (3d Cir. 1990), Judge Aldisert canvassed American and English precedent, courts in the British Commonwealth, and scholarly commentary. Judge Aldisert concluded: | | In United States v. Noonan, 906 F.2d 952 (3d Cir. 1990), Judge Aldisert canvassed American and English precedent, courts in the British Commonwealth, and scholarly commentary. Judge Aldisert concluded: |
| − | <blockquote>Thus, on the basis of long-held traditional views on the effect of a pardon, covering diverse periods and sources [**12] from Bracton and Blackstone to Professor Williston, from seventeenth century English cases to those in contemporary courts of Great Britain and the British Commonwealth, from 1915 teachings of the Supreme Court, and the 1975 analysis of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit, we conclude that the Presidential pardon of 1977 does not eliminate Noonan's 1968 conviction and does not "create any factual fiction" that Noonan's conviction had not occurred to justify expunction of his criminal court record.</blockquote> | + | <blockquote>Thus, on the basis of long-held traditional views on the effect of a pardon, covering diverse periods and sources from Bracton and Blackstone to Professor Williston, from seventeenth century English cases to those in contemporary courts of Great Britain and the British Commonwealth, from 1915 teachings of the Supreme Court, and the 1975 analysis of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit, we conclude that the Presidential pardon of 1977 does not eliminate Noonan's 1968 conviction and does not "create any factual fiction" that Noonan's conviction had not occurred to justify expunction of his criminal court record.</blockquote> |
| | 906 F.2d at 960. United States v. Noonan is pertinent because the recipient of the presidential pardon in that case unsuccessfully requested a court order that he "may, as well as all others must, consider the criminal indictment expunged as if it had never occurred." 906 F.2d at 954. George seeks no less. | | 906 F.2d at 960. United States v. Noonan is pertinent because the recipient of the presidential pardon in that case unsuccessfully requested a court order that he "may, as well as all others must, consider the criminal indictment expunged as if it had never occurred." 906 F.2d at 954. George seeks no less. |
| | ''In re N.'', 314 U.S. App. D.C. 102, 62 F.3d 1434, 1437 (1994). | | ''In re N.'', 314 U.S. App. D.C. 102, 62 F.3d 1434, 1437 (1994). |
| | + | |
| | == Power of Congress to Pardon? == | | == Power of Congress to Pardon? == |
| | It has never been decided whether [[Congress]] can grant pardons itself. Some argue that the grant of the power to pardon only to the President by implication precludes a power to pardon by Congress. But there is Supreme Court authority suggesting that Congress also has the power to pardon.<ref>''Brown v. Walker'', 161 U.S. 591 (1896); ''The Laura'', 114 U.S. 411 (1885).</ref> | | It has never been decided whether [[Congress]] can grant pardons itself. Some argue that the grant of the power to pardon only to the President by implication precludes a power to pardon by Congress. But there is Supreme Court authority suggesting that Congress also has the power to pardon.<ref>''Brown v. Walker'', 161 U.S. 591 (1896); ''The Laura'', 114 U.S. 411 (1885).</ref> |