Not so sure it's correct to say he's already in the "lame duck" phase the article mentions where most presidents stuff their clemency grants. It might be true in a literal sense, but public perception is presumably the main reason presidents wait until that period for this sort of thing, and I'm sure he's still very conscious of how his own PR could affect Harris's campaign.
By the article’s logic, every president elected to a second term has entered their lame duck phase the day after the election.
They have…. That’s why there is a usual trend of bolder actions taken by second term presidents because they’re no longer eligible for candidacy for President.
That’s also why we can’t fuck about with a second Trump term.
Yes, this is not uncommon in US politics.
Here's what Wikipedia has to say about it:
In U.S. politics, the period between (presidential and congressional) elections in November and the inauguration of officials early in the following year is commonly called the "lame-duck period".
A president elected to a second term is sometimes seen as a lame duck from early in the second term, since term limits prevent them from contesting re-election four years later. However, not personally having to face the electorate again makes a second-term president more powerful than they were in their first term as they are thus freer to take politically unpopular actions. However, this comes with caveats; as the de facto leader of their political party, the president's actions affect how the party performs in the midterm elections two years into the second term, and, to some extent, the success of that party's nominee in the next presidential election four years in the future. For these reasons, it can be argued that a president in their second term is not a lame duck at all.
So while you're right that the assertion the author is making is misguided, it's a fallacy that is made often enough that some might conflate it with reality.
They keep trying to extend the term lame duck.
It’s like Christmas season. Soon the lame duck period will start before they even begin campaigning for their first term!
C'mon he won't do this until the elections over. Nothing controversial until after the election.
C'mon he won't do this at all.
Sure he will. There are only 150 of them. The rest are state convictions, which don’t count.
If you say so. Are centrists still saying that he already rescheduled cannabis?
You mean as a tactic to get votes for Kamala?
I mean as a lie, since cannabis hasn't been rescheduled and was never gonna be under Biden.
He asked the DEA to reevaluate which is all he can do legally unless congress passes new laws.
If it hasn't been rescheduled, it's a lie to say it has been rescheduled.
There isn’t a clear yes or no answer to your question, since it is leading.
Are you waiting for someone to be released from federal prison that was only charged with possession?
I'm not waiting for Biden to do anything. I saw how that went with rescheduling. You want to believe Lucy won't pull the football away, go ahead.
Sorry, I don’t know who Lucy is, and I’m not into football.
I'm a really disappointed centrist. Ain't nobody doin' shit.
Hello Mr Crab! What shall we discuss today? Here we have your "b b b but Biden bad!"
They’re just a single-issue voter.
Ok, sure. He'll totally do it. He's not Crime Bill Biden anymore. Most progressive human to ever grace this worthless rock or whatever. No criticism of your god allowed.
Ah sarcasm and appeal to a diety that 'obviously thou worships him like a god', when I simply point out a fact that he won't do a controversial thing until after the election. That a simple fact to you means worship is laughable. I wonder if it's projection.
You speculated he was waiting because it was controversial. I speculated he wasn't going to do it at all. Your speculation is no more fact than mine. Yet you also believed that Biden was gonna reschedule cannabis, and that was a fucking lie too.
It's a fact that pardons, especially controversial ones, come at the end after the election. That this means worship to you is still laughable. You're now just trying to be pedantic on the word fact.
Still mad that it's just a little ahead of the ball to say that he (whatever agency really) rescheduled marijuana? Boy. Not to mention it's just another form of trying to be pedantic.
Still mad that it’s just a little ahead of the ball
He never intended to reschedule, and he ran out the clock.
Didn't we already discuss this? It's not him, it's whatever agency that decides (afaik). He told them to take a look at it hint hint wink wink 'it's not 1960 anymore'.
So, you're still playing pedantic games huh.
Didn’t we already discuss this? It’s not him, it’s whatever agency that decides
He would individually ask every federal employee in person if that's what it took to run out the clock. Or until he got the "no" he was after.
Ahh the b b b but Biden bad! train. See this is the speculation that you project. Are we having fun today yet?
Ahh the b b b but Biden bad! train. See this is the speculation that you project
Whatever you say. Cannabis is rescheduled and the pardons happened. The genocide stopped too. And we're not fracking anymore.
So still pedantic. And of course you know you can't defend that, so you throw strawmans at me so that you can wrap the whole thing into one fake little package. Who accused the other of lies? We see it was projection. Just so you can be mad at me. Fun times huh.
Cannabis still isn't rescheduled. That's an actual fact. Unlike your "He's gonna pardon them after the election" speculation.
You're conflacting people saying "X won't be done until after the election" with "X will be done after the election." The former isn't a declaration that X will be done, just an assertion that if it is done it won't be until after the election.
Yup still mad that it's a little ahead of the ball. Guess you didn't like me pointing out the other things you tried to combine in it because you dropped them pretty quick. All you have is your weird pedantic games.
I also edited my comment about you projecting lies, make sure you read it!
Your mask is slipping.
Oh, what do you suppose I actually am? What mask do you imagine I'm wearing?
The letter referred to mentions "more than 150 people currently serving federal sentences for non-violent cannabis-related offenses" -- not the "estimated 3,000 individuals still incarcerated in our federal prison system for cannabis" that the article states.
Almost all non-violent cannabis-related offenses are state convictions, for which the president has no pardon power. This article seems to gloss over that fact. As others in this thread have stated, no such action is going to happen until after the election anyway.
Whle I don't disagree with the main thrust of this opinion article, it's a bit misleading and unrealistic in its timeline.
unrealistic in its timeline?
people have waited for decades for a president from any party to give any amount of shits
As others in this thread have stated, no such action is going to happen until after the election anyway.
I'll be shocked if he actually keeps his word.
He kicked off the process to have them investigate it so it could be reclassified back in 2022. The reclassification would be the grounds for courts to accept changes in sentences. Once the reclassification is done Congress will have to write the bill, not the executive branch, he's done his part already.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-submits-proposed-regulation-reschedule-marijuana
The president can't just bypass the judicial or legislative branch and magically make it happen.
I suspect that if he intends a mass pardon he will do it after the election. Common sense says that there is more risk of negative campaign influence then positive in this case, and why would he risk it?
He can't pardon people from state crimes, all he can do is pardon from federal. Once reclassified, he can "urge" Congress to write legislation to superceed state laws, be he isn't the the legislative branch.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/514007/grassroots-support-legalizing-marijuana-hits-record.aspx
Looks pretty blatantly positive to me
The difference here is pardoning [clutches pearls] criminals. Which will be spun to dangerous, convicted, surely "seriously bad guys" that plead down to a lesser charge.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News