A constitutional amendment to rein in the president’s pardon authority gained its first Republican supporter in the House last month, as Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska broke ranks to back legislation that would allow Congress to block executive clemency. “It is clear to me the pardon authority has been abused,” Bacon said. His decision came after President Trump granted clemency to more than 1,800 people since January 2025, wiping out $1.3 billion in court-ordered restitution owed to victims and taxpayers.
The Pardon Integrity Act would require a constitutional amendment giving Congress the power to overturn presidential pardons. Rep. Steve Cohen has introduced a companion proposal barring self-pardons and clemency for crimes that personally benefit the president. Both measures face steep odds, needing two-thirds approval in the House and Senate plus ratification by 38 states.
Trump’s clemency spree began on his first day back in office with a sweeping pardon for roughly 1,500 individuals charged or convicted in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The blanket pardon covered everyone from seditious conspiracy convictions to defendants who assaulted police officers. Defense lawyers immediately claimed the pardons extended to related state prosecutions, creating legal chaos still working through the courts.
That same day, Ross Ulbricht walked free. The Silk Road founder had been serving two life sentences plus 40 years for operating a dark web platform that facilitated more than $183 million in drug sales and was connected to at least six fatal overdoses. Trump’s pardon eliminated the roughly $183 million in fines and restitution Ulbricht owed.
A staff analysis by Rep. Jamie Raskin of the House Judiciary Committee found Trump’s pardons erased $1.3 billion in restitution and fines owed to crime victims and the government. Over half the pardons went to individuals convicted of money laundering, bank fraud, or wire fraud. Half of all recipients were business executives or politicians.
Trevor Milton received clemency in March 2025 despite owing roughly $675 million in restitution to Nikola investors he defrauded. Milton and his wife had contributed more than $1.8 million to Trump’s re-election campaign before the November election. His restitution was wiped out entirely by the full and unconditional pardon.
Paul Walczak’s mother donated $1 million to a Trump fundraiser weeks before the president pardoned her son, who had stolen $4.4 million from employee paychecks. Jason Galanis saw his $84.4 million restitution obligation vanish after defrauding the Oglala Sioux Nation of $60 million and receiving a 15-year prison sentence.
Trump extended clemency to major drug traffickers beginning in May 2025 with Garnett Gilbert Smith, identified by the DEA as one of Baltimore’s biggest cocaine and heroin distributors who moved over 1,000 kilograms of cocaine in less than two years. By November 2025, former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández received a pardon despite his conviction for helping transport 400 tons of cocaine into the United States and a 45-year federal prison sentence. Trump ally Roger Stone had directly contacted the president on Hernández’s behalf.
Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao also received a full pardon after pleading guilty to failing to maintain anti-money laundering controls that allowed money to reach terrorists and child abusers. The pardon drew scrutiny given Zhao’s business connections to World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s cryptocurrency enterprise.
Lobbyists told The Wall Street Journal that $1 million has become the standard fee for pardon lobbying work, with some clients offering success fees reaching $6 million.
In The Federalist Papers: No. 74 (The Command of the Military and Naval Forces, and the Pardoning Power of the Executive), Alexander Hamilton argued that concentrating the pardon power in one individual would “naturally inspire scrupulousness and caution.” He assumed presidential responsibility would prevent abuse — that no chief executive would be shameless enough to misuse such solemn authority. Hamilton imagined pardons as tools of mercy to soften harsh criminal penalties in instances of “unfortunate guilt.”
Constitutional scholars now call this expectation “Hamilton’s Folly” — an Enlightenment-era miscalculation about executive virtue. The Constitution provides virtually no constraints on pardon authority. Impeachment requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate, never achieved in American history. The Supreme Court holds no original jurisdiction over pardons.
The pardon power remains what the framers designed: stunningly unfettered, reliant entirely on the moral character of the person exercising it. Hamilton wagered the republic on presidential decency. That wager looks increasingly unwise.