Connect with us

Politics

Biden sets record with first-term clemency grants, here's how others presidents rank

Published

on

Biden sets record with first-term clemency grants, here's how others presidents rank

President Biden made history last week when he commuted the sentences of nearly 1,500 prisoners and pardoned another 39 people – sparking mixed reactions from lawmakers, including Democrats, who noted that his actions far outpace the clemency actions of any other U.S. president serving his first term in office.

In a statement last week announcing the new clemency actions, Biden said America “was built on the promise of possibility and second chances.”

“As president, I have the great privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities, and taking steps to remove sentencing disparities for nonviolent offenders, especially those convicted of drug offenses,” Biden said.

Biden’s lengthy list sparked mixed reaction from some lawmakers and criminal justice reform advocates, who questioned the administration’s decision-making in determining prisoners that were eligible for clemency. 

BIDEN CLEMENCY ANNOUNCEMENT GETS MIXED REVIEWS ON CAPITOL HILL: ‘WHERE’S THE BAR?’

Advertisement

The Biden administration told CNN that the decisions on who could be included were not made on an individual basis, but rather, was a “uniform” decision granted to people with a record of good behavior while on house arrest. 

That includes former Illinois city comptroller Rita Crundwell, who, in 2012, pleaded guilty to a nearly $55 million embezzlement scheme, and former Pennsylvania judge Michael Conahan, who was convicted in 2011 for his role in a “Kids-for-Cash” scheme, in which children were sent to for-profit detention centers in return for millions of dollars of kickbacks from the private prisons. 

A full list of individuals included in Biden’s most recent clemency action can be found on the Justice Department website. The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News’s request for comment on its decision-making in issuing presidential pardons.

Biden’s decision to include Conahan on his list of prisoners granted clemency was sharply criticized Friday by Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat who had been considered on Vice President Kamala Harris’ short-list for running mate earlier this year.

Shapiro said Friday he thinks Biden got it “absolutely wrong” in granting clemency to Conahan, saying the decision has “created a lot of pain here in northeastern Pennsylvania.” 

Advertisement

“Some children took their lives because of this. Families were torn apart,” Shapiro said of the for-profit detention center scandal.

BIDEN STIRS OUTRAGE IN SCRANTON BY COMMUTING ‘KIDS FOR CASH’ JUDGE’S SENTENCE

Joe and son Hunter Biden taking a walk. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Before leaving office in 2017, President Barack Obama granted clemency to 1,927 individuals during his two terms as president – the highest total of any modern president going back to former president Harry Truman, also a Democrat, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of Justice Department data. 

Truman, who served as president from 1945 to 1953, granted clemency to 2,044 individuals during his two terms in office – slightly outpacing Obama’s list. 

Advertisement

Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was elected president four times, granted a total of 3,687 pardons, sentence commutations and other acts of clemency during his time in the White House. After Roosevelt died in office during his fourth term, the U.S. Constitution was ratified to limit all future presidents to two terms in office.

Others noted the differences between individuals included on Biden’s clemency list and those who saw reduced or pardoned sentences under Obama.

The vast majority of Obama’s clemency actions focused on commuting the sentences of federal inmates who met certain criteria outlined under his administration’s Clemency Initiative, a program that ended in 2017 when Trump took office.

But critics have noted the stark differences between the number of individuals selected for clemency under each president – and any relationship to a sitting commander in chief.

During his presidency, Barack Obama granted clemency to 1,927 individuals. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Advertisement

The Obama administration, for example, largely focused its commutations and reductions on nonviolent drug offenders, including many who had been sentenced under mandatory minimum sentencing laws passed by Congress in the late 1980s. 

These clemency grants came under sharp criticism by some Republicans, who accused Obama of imposing his political will to end certain mandatory minimum sentences – which many argued at the time minimized the “lawmaking authority” of Congress.

But Biden’s clemency grants also far outpace his predecessor, Donald Trump, during his first term in office. 

 

Between 2017 and 2021, Trump granted just 143 pardons and 93 sentence commutations – amounting to just 2% of the clemency applications that his administration received, according to available Justice Department data. 

Advertisement

Some noted that the individuals selected for clemency during Trump’s first term also appear to bear a very different list of criteria compared to former presidents.

An analysis conducted by Lawfare found that 29 of the 34 pardons granted by Trump were not based on recommendations of the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney. 

Such recommendations are not necessary for clemency, but presidents in recent memory have relied on the DOJ for input into worthy recipients for pardons and commutations.

Politics

Federal judge scorches Dems for pandering to Latinos with California map in fiery dissent

Published

on

Federal judge scorches Dems for pandering to Latinos with California map in fiery dissent

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A federal judge criticized the process by which California’s voter-approved congressional map to redraw districts to favor Democrats in a dissenting opinion, saying the state engaged in “racial gerrymandering.”

Judge Kenneth Lee noted his concerns about race being a factor in his dissent as a panel of judges voted 2-1 to uphold the map.

“California sullied its hands with this sordid business when it engaged in racial gerrymandering as part of its mid-decade congressional redistricting plan to add five more Democratic House seats,” Lee wrote. 

“We know race likely played a predominant role in drawing at least one district because the smoking gun is in the hands of Paul Mitchell, the mapmaker who drew the congressional redistricting map adopted by the California state legislature,” he added. 

Advertisement

DOJ ACCUSES DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN ARM OF OBSTRUCTION IN LAWSUIT OVER CALIFORNIA REDISTRICTING

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during an election night press conference at a California Democratic Party office Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2025, in Sacramento, Calif. (Godofredo A. Vásquez/AP Photo)

The court rejected a claim by Republicans that the map approved as part of Proposition 50 violated the Voting Rights Act by drawing maps to favor Hispanic and Latino voters.

READ THE COURT ORDER – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

The decision allows California to use the map, which could give Democrats more House seats. The California Republican Party said it will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency injunction. 

Advertisement

“The well-reasoned dissenting opinion better reflects our interpretation of the law and the facts, which we will reassert to the Supreme Court,” California GOP Chairwoman Corrin Rankin said in a statement. “The map drawer’s plain statements acknowledging that he racially gerrymandered the Proposition 50 maps, which he and the legislature refused to explain or deny, in addition to our experts’ testimony, established that the courts should stop the implementation of the Prop 50 map. We look forward to continuing this fight in the courts.” 

REPUBLICANS PUSH BACK OVER ‘FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM’ IN BLOCKBUSTER REDISTRICTING FIGHT

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at a “Yes On Prop 50” volunteer event at the LA Convention Center in Los Angeles. (Getty Images)

Lee noted that mapmaker Paul Mitchell refused to appear before the panel, but had allegedly publicly boasted to his political allies that he drew the map to “ensure that the Latino districts.”

“In embarking on a mid-decade redistricting plan to create more Democratic-friendly districts, California relied on race to create at least one Latino-majority congressional district,” he wrote. “To be clear, as the majority explains, California began its mid-cycle redistricting attempt after Texas initiated its own redistricting in favor of Republicans. But that larger partisan goal does not negate that California’s Democratic state legislature sought to maintain and expand a racial spoils system.”

Advertisement

Prop 50 was the result of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders asking voters whether the state should redraw congressional lines by targeting five Republican strongholds. 

The move was a countermeasure to Texas’ efforts to send more Republicans to the House. 

“Republicans’ weak attempt to silence voters failed,” Newsom said in a statement. “California voters overwhelmingly supported Prop 50 – to respond to Trump’s rigging in Texas – and that is exactly what this court concluded.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott also launched a redistricting push in his state. (Antranik Tavitian/Reuters)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

House maps are typically redrawn every 10 years following the census, and the process rarely takes place mid-decade.

Fox News Digital’s Michael Sinkewicz contributed to this report. 

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump threatens to use the Insurrection Act to quell protests in Minneapolis

Published

on

Trump threatens to use the Insurrection Act to quell protests in Minneapolis

President Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act Thursday as part of his immigration crackdown, blaming politicians in Minnesota who have opposed Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents’ presence in the city and decried their violence against protesters.

“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

The president made his threat a day after a federal immigration officer shot a Minneapolis man in the leg. The agency said the man attacked federal officers with a shovel and a broom as they tried to complete a targeted traffic stop.

If Trump invoked the Insurrection Act, he could deploy federal troops to the state.

Protests have intensified in the Minnesota city in the last week since an ICE agent shot Renee Good, a local woman who was part of a group observing ICE activity, in the head.

Advertisement

Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, was killed as she took part in an “ICE watch” protest documenting federal immigration activity, after three ICE agents surrounded her SUV on a snowy street.

Bystander videos shows one immigration officer ordering Good out of the vehicle and grabbing the door handle as another agent, Jonathan Ross, positions himself in front of her vehicle. As she begins to move the SUV forward, Ross raises his weapon and fires at least three shots at close range.

Ross suffered internal bleeding to his torso from the encounter, according to a statement from Homeland Security officials provided to the Associated Press.

“I would say that our agent is beat up, he’s bruised, he’s injured, he’s getting treatment,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told reporters Thursday, saying the agency was “thankful that he made it out alive.”

Video from the incident showed Ross curse at Good after shooting her then walking away from the incident.

Advertisement

After Good was fatally shot, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat, told ICE to “get the f— out of Minneapolis” and dubbed federal claims that its officers killed Good in self defense “bulls—.” Still, he has urged residents to act peacefully, warning them Trump could call in the military.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has also spoken out against ICE and earlier this week, the state’s Atty. Gen. Keith Ellison filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, asking the court to block the surge of Homeland Security agents into the state and declare it unconstitutional and unlawful.

“Over the last week, we’ve seen federal agents arresting, threatening, and using force against innocent bystanders,” Walz said Monday in a statement. “They have carried out enforcement actions in schools, at hospitals, and in one horrific instance shot and killed someone… This operation was never about safety, it’s a targeted political operation and Minnesota won’t stand for it.”

On Thursday, Noem singled out Walz for criticism, telling reporters outside the White House that the Minnesota governor is “still is not willing to work with our federal officers to bring peace to the streets of Minneapolis.”

The federal government had no plans to pull out of Minnesota, Noem said, noting she had discussed the Insurrection Act with Trump.

Advertisement

“He certainly has the constitutional authority to utilize that,” she said. “My hope is that this leadership team in Minnesota will start to work with us to get criminals off the streets.”

Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has also singled out Walz and Frey.

“Minnesota insurrection is a direct result of a FAILED governor and a TERRIBLE mayor encouraging violence against law enforcement,” he said on X. “It’s disgusting. Walz and Frey — I’m focused on stopping YOU from your terrorism by whatever means necessary. This is not a threat. It’s a promise.”

The Insurrection Act, established in 1807, is a federal law that allows a president to deploy the military domestically to suppress in specific circumstances, such as civil disorder, an insurrection, or armed rebellion against the federal government.

If Trump invoked the Insurrection Act, he would be empowering the military to make arrests and perform searches on U.S. soil. In normal circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law enacted after the Civil War, forbids active-duty federal forces to provide regular civilian law enforcement unless authorized by Congress or the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

Advertisement

The president first threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act against protesters in the summer of 2020, but members of his Cabinet and military advisors blocked the move. In June 2025, he repeated the threat against protesters in Los Angeles as people took to the streets to protest ICE raids.

“The people who are causing the problems are bad people,” Trump told reporters then, “they are insurrectionists.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Hochul endorses legislation to allow New Yorkers to sue ICE agents: ‘Power does not justify abuse’

Published

on

Hochul endorses legislation to allow New Yorkers to sue ICE agents: ‘Power does not justify abuse’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is supporting legislation that would allow state residents to sue ICE agents for violating their constitutional rights.

The governor said on Tuesday during her State of the State address that she wants to allow New Yorkers to “hold ICE agents accountable in court when they act outside the scope of their duties.”

“This doesn’t interfere with lawful enforcement or public safety,” Hochul said. “It simply affirms a core truth: Power does not justify abuse. And if someone’s constitutional rights are violated here in the state of New York, I say they deserve their day in court.”

Last year, New York State Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Micah Lasher proposed measures to allow private citizens to file lawsuits against federal officials who violate their constitutional rights.

Advertisement

REP RO KHANNA DEMANDS PROSECUTION OF ICE AGENT IN MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTING

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is backing legislation that would allow state residents to sue ICE agents for violating their constitutional rights. (Julia Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Lasher’s version cites Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, which allows people to sue state and local officials for violating their rights. The proposal highlights that New York does not have a law in place allowing citizens to sue federal officials.

“Every day, ICE is terrorizing our communities & violating our civil rights. We must be able to hold them accountable,” Lasher, who is running for Congress, wrote on X, adding that he is glad Hochul is taking up his legislation.

Multiple states, including California, Massachusetts and New Jersey, have implemented similar laws allowing residents to sue federal officials.

Advertisement

Hochul also proposed other immigration guardrails, including a measure to require judicial warrants before ICE can conduct raids in sensitive locations like schools, churches and hospitals.

People march during a protest after the killing of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Getty Images)

Earlier this year, the Trump administration reversed a Biden administration policy barring immigration arrests in these sensitive locations.

The governor also announced that New York “will not allow the use of state resources to assist in federal immigration raids on people who have not committed serious crimes.”

Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin alleged in a statement to The Hill that Hochul “continues to smear law enforcement who are simply enforcing the rule of law and are putting their lives on the line to remove violent criminals from New York.”

Advertisement

ICE HEAD SAYS AGENTS FACING ‘CONSTANT IMPEDIMENTS’ AFTER MIGRANT SEEN RAMMING CARS WHILE TRYING TO FLEE

Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen, was fatally shot by ICE agent Jonathan Ross in Minnesota. (Getty Images)

McLaughlin also argued that there has been an increase in threats against federal law enforcement officers who she purports have shown “incredible restraint and professionalism in exhausting all options before any kind of non-lethal force is used.”

This debate has intensified after a recent incident in Minneapoliss, where Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen, was fatally shot by an ICE agent during an enforcement action. Protests followed in multiple cities, and Democrats and local residents have condemned the shooting and urged charges against the agent.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The Trump administration and Republican lawmakers have defended the incident by arguing that it was a justified shooting.

Officials are also investigating a second ICE-involved shooting that happened in Minneapolis on Wednesday, as the mayor continues to demand that the agency leave the city and state.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending