I’d think the only problem with that would be
1. they haven’t been charged with a crime and
2. they haven’t been named.
They have been named:) They self registered for the “dream act” We have a list.
1. they haven’t been charged with a crime and
2. they haven’t been named.
.
And, if they were identified to take advantage of such a "pardon", and if the new SCOTUS denied or reversed such an illegal and extraconstitutional "mass pardon",
...then would we not know who they are, where they reside, and where to arrest them?
.
Exactly. This is a nation with a constitution that makes the INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN king. You can’t pardon a group. You can only pardon a person. And the first thing you need is that person’s name.
Now, you can pass a law that affects all the illegals, but a President can’t do that alone. They’re kinda stuck. :-)
It’s legally called amnesty, which is a pardon applied to a whole class of people. It has been used a number of times in American history (especially after the Civil War). Individuals don’t need to be individually named or charged.
Doesn’t matter, as pardon/amnesty is only for crimes during a specified time and does not apply to the day after the pardon/amnesty specifies. An illegal entrant into the US could be deported as usual the day after the pardon.
The only hypothetical advantage MIGHT be that such a person could not be barred from entering the US in the future on the basis of past illegal entry, assuming they could get out of the US without it being officially noticed.
One does not have to be charged before one is pardoned, but a group pardon would be on shakier ground
The whole thing is moot anyway, because he could pardon for all crime committed up to this instant, but not for the crime of being here illegally they would commit one instant later.