"According to Associate Justice Joseph McKenna, writing the majority opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court case Burdick v. United States, a pardon "carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it.""
That's what I was referring to. Accepting a pardon = admission of guilt. Because he has admitted to a crime, Flynn therefore cannot serve in the admin.
Don't understand the downvotes. I'm more than happy to be wrong on this, but I would like to know the legal reasoning behind why I am wrong.
I read someone in this thread mentioning “unconditional” or “conditional” pardon, unconditional being his civil rights are completely restored as if he never did anything wrong.
True. It's a shame.
"According to Associate Justice Joseph McKenna, writing the majority opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court case Burdick v. United States, a pardon "carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it.""
That's what I was referring to. Accepting a pardon = admission of guilt. Because he has admitted to a crime, Flynn therefore cannot serve in the admin.
Don't understand the downvotes. I'm more than happy to be wrong on this, but I would like to know the legal reasoning behind why I am wrong.
A full pardon restores the person's innocence as though he or she had never committed a crime.
So basically you're wrong (in the nicest way)
So all rights are restored as a result. Got it. Thank you! Like I said - happy to be wrong, just wanted to know the legal reasoning why.
I read someone in this thread mentioning “unconditional” or “conditional” pardon, unconditional being his civil rights are completely restored as if he never did anything wrong.
Does that mean he can't be appointed to anything?