Washington D.C. – In a move that underscores a potentially sweeping application of executive power, former President Donald Trump has once again leveraged his constitutional authority over clemency, recently granting a pardon to an individual for the second time. This unusual sequence of pardons, detailed in recent actions, signals a continued reliance on this presidential prerogative, setting it apart from previous administrations.
The latest round of pardons, announced Friday, included a notable case: Adriana Camberos. Camberos received a pardon from President Trump during his first term, related to earlier fraud convictions. However, she was recently convicted again in 2024 for a separate scheme involving the deceptive resale of wholesale groceries and other goods. Trump subsequently granted her a second, distinct pardon for this new federal conviction.
The Scope and Rarity of Double Pardons
While the power to pardon is explicitly granted to the President under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the repeated use of this power on the same person, especially for distinct offenses, is statistically rare. Legal experts confirm the technical legality of such actions but note their unusual nature in the modern political landscape.
“A president absolutely does have the power to grant the same person two different pardons on two different cases, even if they’re sequential. The pardon power itself is essentially unlimited,” noted CNN’s senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, emphasizing the broad interpretation of this executive authority.
Jeffrey Crouch, an associate professor at American University, pointed to historical precedents showing that this isn't entirely unprecedented, though still uncommon. Crouch highlighted instances during Trump’s first term where clemency was applied twice to the same person, often involving both a commutation and a subsequent full pardon.
Distinguishing Clemency: Pardon vs. Commutation
It is crucial to understand the two primary forms of clemency available to a president, both applicable only to federal charges:
- Pardon: A full legal forgiveness that erases the conviction, restoring civil rights lost due to that conviction.
- Commutation: The reduction of a sentence (such as imprisonment or a fine) without erasing the underlying conviction.
Crouch referenced key examples from the previous administration: “He commuted Roger Stone’s prison sentence in July 2020 and then granted him a full pardon in December 2020,” he explained via email. Similarly, Alice Marie Johnson, whose case gained significant public attention, had her sentence commuted in June 2018, followed by a full pardon in August 2020.
Clemency in the Context of January 6th and Second Term Focus
President Trump’s use of clemency has often been viewed through a political lens, particularly concerning individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. The administration has previously granted sweeping pardons to many involved in that day’s events.
A further example of this repeated clemency involved Dan Wilson, a militia member from the January 6th events. Trump issued an initial broad pardon for Wilson, and later issued a second, separate pardon specifically covering firearm offenses that were not included in the initial sweeping clemency action. The White House at the time indicated the gun charges were a specific focus for executive intervention.
The pattern suggests that in his current term, the President is employing clemency not just as a final act of mercy, but as an ongoing tool to intervene in federal cases, even those resulting in subsequent convictions for the same individual.
Legal Ramifications and Political Implications
The aggressive deployment of presidential pardon power raises questions about accountability and the separation of powers, although legally, the President operates within established constitutional boundaries. Critics often argue that such actions undermine the judicial process and the deterrent effect of federal law enforcement.
Conversely, supporters view the pardon power as a vital check against perceived overreach by federal prosecutors and a mechanism for correcting what they see as unjust sentences. The Camberos case, involving unrelated fraud convictions separated by a prior commutation, highlights the administration’s willingness to apply this power across different legal contexts.
As the political landscape continues to evolve, the frequency and specificity of these second-term clemency actions—particularly the unusual double pardon for Camberos—will undoubtedly remain a significant point of focus for legal scholars, political commentators, and the public alike, illustrating a commitment to a broad interpretation of executive mercy.
