Kavanaugh Refuses to Say If Donald Trump Can Pardon Himself

Music to the president’s ears.

Alex Edelman/ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Brett Kavanaugh is facing a grilling on Capitol Hill today, the second day of his Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing to become the next Supreme Court justice.

He’s been questioned about a variety of hot-button issues, including Roe v. Wade and assault weapons. But the most noteworthy moments from the hearing might relate to issues that Kavanaugh has been reluctant to address before the committee: law enforcement officials’ ability to subpoena the president and the president’s pardon power—two topics that loom over Donald Trump’s presidency and the ongoing investigations by special counsel Robert Mueller and other federal prosecutors.

“Can a sitting president be required to respond to a subpoena?” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the committee’s top Democrat, asked at the top of Wednesday’s hearing. 

Kavanaugh described the question as a hypothetical one and insisted that he therefore couldn’t provide an answer to it.

“My understanding is that you’re asking me to give my view on a potential hypothetical, and that’s something that each of the eight justices currently sitting on the Supreme Court when they were sitting in my seat declined to decide potential hypothetical cases,” he said.

Curiously, Feinstein proceeded to thank Kavanaugh for his “forthcoming” response.

Later in the hearing, Kavanaugh refused to answer a question on the president’s ability to pardon himself.

“President Trump claims he has an absolute right to pardon himself. Does he?” Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked.

“The question of self-pardons is something I have never analyzed. It’s a question that I have not written about. It’s a question, therefore, that’s a hypothetical question that I can’t begin to answer in this context as a sitting judge and as a nominee to the Supreme Court,” Kavanaugh said.

When asked if the president had the legal standing to pardon an individual in exchange for a promise not to testify against the president, Kavanaugh again declined. Leahy remarked that for the sake of the country, he hoped it would remain a hypothetical question.

While it’s unclear if Trump has been tuning into the hearing—his Twitter account on Wednesday appeared laser-focused on other topics, most notably Bob Woodward’s forthcoming book and the NFL—it’s safe to assume that the president is likely very pleased with his nominee’s performance and staunch refusal to opine on the very real legal issues threatening his presidency.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend