Tag: Obama

Federal pardon filings skyrocket, but pardon grants still down

New clemency statistics just posted on the Pardon Attorney’s website show that almost 1000 petitions for full pardon were filed in FY 2016, and that more than 1900 pardon petitions are presently pending.   We have become accustomed to seeing huge numbers of commutation filings, but the large number of pardon filings is much more surprising in light of President Obama’s meager pardon grant rate to date.  The 998 petitions filed in the 12-month period just concluded are almost twice the number filed in any single year since the Roosevelt Administration, including in the analogous period in the Bush 43 presidency. We reported in August that there were 1378 pardon petitions pending in June – which means that 550 new petitions must have been filed in less than 4 months.  That’s as many pardon petitions as have been filed in any full year in the past 75 years. In August we reported on President Obama’s stated intention to grant a large number of full pardons before the end of his term, in addition to sentence commutations: “I would argue that by the time I leave office, the number of pardons that we grant will be roughly in line with what other presidents have done.”  But to match even George W. Bush’s 189 pardon grants, President Obama will have to grant more than 120 pardons in the next three months. White House Counsel Neil Eggleston stated yesterday that the number of commutation grants since 2014 “make clear that the President and his administration have succeeded in efforts to reinvigorate the clemency process.”  But without action on the pardon side of the clemency docket it is too early to claim more than partial success. Read more

Can the pardon power be revived through procedural reforms?

Mark Osler has posted a new piece arguing for an overhaul of the federal pardon process so that it more closely resembles efficient and productive state clemency systems. He argues that flaws in the process for administering the power, rather than a failure of executive will, have prevented President Obama from carrying out his ambitious clemency agenda directed atlong-sentenced drug offenders.  Streamlining the process will enable presidents to use the power more generously and effectively. This seems to us to an oversimplified solution to the theoretical and practical problems with what President Obama has been trying to do. Moreover, at least in the absence of constitutional amendment, any structural changes in the federal pardon process would have to be reaffirmed by each new president, and would likely be opposed by the Justice Department and Congress. An alternative to trying to revive pardon as an integral part of the criminal justice system would be to concede that pardon cannot wholly compensate for shortcomings in the legal system, and work to develop statutory alternatives. Our preference would be for this alternative, and specifically to enlist the courts to shorten long prison sentences and avoid or mitigate collateral consequences. This is the approach proposed in the revised articles of the Model Penal Code: Sentencing. As President Obama’s term winds down, we expect to post additional commentary on his use of the pardon power, and on proposals floated by his putative successors about the pressing systemic problems for which pardon is now seen as the sole solution.  In the meantime, see these earlier posts on this subject: Prez promises to catch up on pardons — but he’s far behind Slate asks why presidents are granting less clemency; Justice answers Should DOJ be gatekeeper of president’s pardon power? Clemency is Not the Answer (Updated) “Poised to commute dozens of sentences, Obama remains the ‘Scrooge’ of pardons” The “president’s idle executive power” and collateral consequences     Read more

New reports document federal progress on collateral consequences

The Presidential Memorandum that formally established the Reentry Council in April 2016 mandated a report documenting the Council’s accomplishments to date and plans moving forward.  The resulting report, The Federal Interagency Reentry Council: A Record of Progress and a Roadmap for the Future, was issued today. Also today the White House issued a fact sheet with new commitments to the Fair Chance Business Pledge. Finally, the Justice Department released a National Reentry Week After Action Report.  We will be taking a close look at these reports on the federal government’s recent efforts to address collateral consequences, and expect to post the results of our review shortly.     Read more

Prez promises to catch up on pardons — but he’s far behind

We have wondered whether President Obama would ever turn his attention to what has become the red-headed stepchild of the clemency caseload: full pardons to restore rights and status after service of sentence.  To date President Obama has focused on commuting prison sentences, and has issued fewer pardons than any full-term president since the Civil War.  It appears that the time may be at hand. The Politico reported on Thursday that at a press conference the day after his most recent batch of sentence commutations, President Obama said he intended to grant more full pardons before the end of his term – a lot more. At a news conference at the Pentagon on Thursday, a reporter [Greg Korte of USA Today] noted that Obama has been the stingiest two-term president on forgiveness since John Adams.  Obama acknowledged that his administration has “focused more on commutations than we have on pardons.” “I would argue,” he continued, “that by the time I leave office, the number of pardons that we grant will be roughly in line with what other presidents have done.” The President also indicated that he did not intend to change his pardoning practices at the end of his term: “The process that I’ve put in place is not going to vary depending on how close I get to the election.” President Obama will no doubt grant more full pardons before the end of his term, in addition to more commutations.  But it will be a tall order for him to match his predecessors even “roughly” in absolute number of pardons.  For example, George W. Bush granted 189 pardons, Bill Clinton granted 396, and Ronald Reagan granted 393.  Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford granted 593 and 382 full pardons, respectively. By contrast, after seven and a half years Obama has granted a total of only 66 full pardons (not counting the four pre-conviction pardons granted to Iranians prior in last year’s foreign policy “swap”).  Only George H.W. Bush had issued fewer grants nearing the end of his tenure — and to be fair he served only one term and received far fewer applications. As of the beginning of June there were 1378 applications for full pardon awaiting President Obama’s action (in addition to more than 12,000 applications for commutation of sentence).  He has granted only two full post-sentence pardons in the past 30 months, both in December 2014.  If he is serious about wanting to match his predecessors in number of pardon grants, and not wanting to bunch grants at the end of his term, he had better get started on his pardoning regime soon. The absolute number of applications for full pardon filed under President Obama has been higher than in any Administration since FDR, when more than 30% of pardon applications were granted. By contrast, the percentage of pardon requests granted by President Obama to date has been about 2.5%.  This has meant that people with federal convictions have had little hope of avoiding or mitigating collateral consequences. Steve Nelson reported on the President’s ambitious undertaking in U.S. News (“Obama Says He Will Catch Up on Pardons, But He’s Far Behind”): President Barack Obama said Thursday he intends to issue about as many pardons as his predecessors by the time he leaves office in January. But Obama has a long way to go – to date he’s pardoned fewer people than any president since James Garfield, who was fatally shot in 1881 after less than three months in office. . . . . “It concerns me that this really important part of the clemency caseload has been so neglected,” says Margaret Love, who served as the U.S. pardon attorney from 1990 to 1997 under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. “It’s bad enough that the president is the only way to go for people who have served their sentence and are seeking relief from collateral consequences and restoration of their rights,” she told U.S. News shortly before the president’s news conference. “But when the president says ‘the door is closed, I’m not home for you,’ that’s very troublesome. I’m not sure he appreciates that that in effect is what he’s said.” . . . . The possible explanations for Obama’s stingy pardon-giving vary, but it’s a frustration for Love’s clients seeking a sense of forgiveness before they die or the ability to become U.S. citizens despite minor and decades-old convictions. One possible reason for the president’s inaction is caution inspired by recent history. Obama noted this Thursday, saying clemency “is politically risky” and that “everyone remembers that Willie Horton ad” that was used to attack 1988 Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis. He said advisers “earlier in my presidency” advised him to be cautious. Abner Mikva, Clinton’s third White House counsel, said he spoke with Obama even before he took office and recalled “a lengthy discussion about Marc Rich,” the wealthy fugitive and Democratic donor who Clinton controversially pardoned in his final days in office. “I think he was very, very dismayed by the Marc Rich pardon … [and] how even a good president can be corrupted by the pardons process,” Mikva said. A second possible explanation is the deluge of petitions coming into the pardon office after the Justice Department in 2014 announced its Clemency Initiative for nonviolent offenders whose crimes today would receive shorter sentences. Obama gave indication this, too, could be a contributing factor, mentioning financial constraints. This explanation is supported by the resignation letter of Deborah Leff, who left her post as U.S. pardon attorney in January, saying there was insufficient staffing to handle a flood of petitions, meaning “thousands of petitioners seeking justice will lie unheard.” Leff wrote that because of the influx, “I have been instructed to set aside thousands of petitions for pardon and traditional commutation.” A third possible explanation is offered by Love: that pardon requests are, without correction from Obama, being unnecessarily slowed by Justice Department prosecutors who also could alleviate clemency system burdens by going to court to shorten sentences. The former pardon attorney says the Justice Department – whose deputy attorney general reviews pardon attorney decisions before they are sent to the White House – could seek to use a statute known for allowing “compassionate release” of prisoners to shorten unreasonably long sentences. The law allows reductions if there are “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” “It doesn’t make sense to try to deal with a systemic problem affecting thousands of people through the clemency power. Some solution through the courts has got to be found,” she says. “Even if the president does another thousand of these [commutation] cases, there still will be many left behind.” . . . Love says she would not recommend that Obama do last-minute research on Google to find prisoners worthy of a pardon, as he needs to insulate himself from controversies such as those faced by Clinton and instead go with vetted cases in moderately sized batches. . . . Love also says a long-term fix is necessary and that states may offer a good model for reform, with laws being passed that mitigate collateral consequences of conviction. She views Delaware as a model, where regular public meetings are held to address pardons. “George W. did whatever the department sent to him. He ate his spinach and he ate it promptly. And occasionally he would ask why he wasn’t getting more,” she says. “All [Obama] needs to say is, ‘I want to do some pardons’.” Read more

Will Prez Obama make federal contractors ban the box? [Update: Not now.]

  Updated April 29: According to comments late this week from senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett, the President remains inclined to defer to Congress when it comes to making federal contractors ban the box: Asked whether there was consideration of whether to take action to require federal contractors to “ban the box,” Jarrett said, “The president has supported federal legislation that would ban the box for federal contractors. He thinks that’s the best approach.” The legislation in question appears to have stalled, as noted by its sponsor Rep. Elijah Cummings.  (In a tweet, Jarrett pointed advocates to a 2013 directive of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance reminding contractors of their obligation to comply with the EEOC guidance on criminal records.) On the other hand, on Friday the administration made good on its November promise to require federal agencies to ban the box, when OPM announced a proposed rule requiring federal agencies to postpone inquiry into an applicant’s criminal record until after a conditional offer of employment has been made. Also, marking the end of National Reentry Week, the President formally established the Federal Interagency Reentry Council, a Cabinet-level working group dedicated to “the rehabilitation and reintegration of individuals returning to their communities from prisons and jails.”  Originally convened by the Attorney General in 2011, the President’s action ensures that the Council will continue past the end of his Administration. Original post from April 26: As the White House inaugural National Reentry Week begins, advocacy organizations and Members of Congress are again calling on President Obama to use his executive authority to “ban the box” in federal contractor hiring, just as he announced he would do in federal agency hiring last November. The call comes on the heels of a number of steps the Obama Administration has taken to improve the employment prospects of those with criminal histories, including the creation of the Fair Chance Business Pledge earlier this month.  Last fall, the President announced a number of additional reentry initiatives, including establishment of a Clean Slate Clearinghouse.  The President’s overall record on second-chance issues has been commendable, but he will have to move quickly to maximize his administration’s impact before the end of his term. The 170,000 federal contractors employ a full 25% of the nation’s workforce, and all of them are subject to Executive regulation via the terms of their contracts.  As such, the President has significant authority to regulate private sector hiring policies.  He also has an efficient means of enforcing those regulations through termination of contracts with noncompliant employers.  To date, however, the President has deferred to Congress where regulation of contractors is concerned, urging it to pass the Fair Chance Act which would extend a ban-the-box policy to contractors by statute. But since that announcement, the Fair Chance Act has languished in committee, and it seems increasingly unlikely that a policy that applies to contractors will become a reality before the end of the President’s term unless the President implements it himself.  Last Wednesday, Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD), the Act’s sponsor, acknowledged its dim prospects in urging the President not to wait for Congress.  In an open letter, joined by 21 other Members, he wrote: On November 2, 2015, you also explained that “Congress should pass legislation that builds on today’s announcement. ”  We agree, and have been working diligently with our colleagues in Congress to advance the Fair Chance Act (H.R. 3470), which would extend ban the box policies to all three branches of the federal government and prime federal contractors. However, without a clear path forward for the legislation, we are respectfully calling upon you to drive these issues forward with executive action. Yesterday, a coalition of 136 advocacy organizations (including the CCRC) led by the National Employment Law Project (NELP) wrote to the President urging him to extend fair chance hiring policies to federal contractors. As the NELP letter points out, the additional burden on many large federal contractors would be slight since they are already subject to ban-the-box laws at the state level: [B]ecause most of the nation’s largest federal contractors operate across state lines, they are already subject to multiple state and local ban-the-box laws. Indeed, seven states (Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, and Rhode Island) and many of the nation’s largest cities (including Baltimore, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, Seattle, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.) have fair hiring mandates in place covering private sector employers.[2. Many other states ban-the-box in public hiring, but none of those policies extend to state contractors.] As a result, roughly 25 percent of the nation’s civilian workforce (or over 40 million workers) are employed in a state or locality where private sector employers are obligated to comply with a ban-the-box law. Thus, abundant precedent exists to help pave the way for a federal executive order regulating the nation’s private contractors.   Additionally, many large federal contractors have already chosen to adopt ban-the-box policies of their own accord, including Xerox, Google, and Koch Industries/Georgia Pacific. In his speech announcing the federal agency ban-the-box policy this past November, President Obama said, Now, a lot of time, [a] record disqualifies you from being a full participant in our society — even if you’ve already paid your debt to society.  It means millions of Americans have difficulty even getting their foot in the door to try to get a job much less actually hang on to that job.  That’s bad for not only those individuals, it’s bad for our economy.  It’s bad for the communities that desperately need more role models who are gainfully employed.  So we’ve got to make sure Americans who’ve paid their debt to society can earn their second chance. Banning the box in federal contractor hiring would go a long way toward achieving this goal, by giving countless American workers the opportunity to demonstrate their employment qualifications before employers become aware of their criminal histories. But the clock is counting down on the President’s chance to make that important change a part of his legacy. You can read entirety of the Congressional letter here, and the letter from the NELP-led coalition here.   Read more