President Biden has only granted 1.4% of clemency petitions submitted. There are four months left for cannabis justice before his term ends.

With the president’s decision to drop out of the race, he has effectively begun a longer lame-duck period, which is historically when most presidential clemency grants have occurred.

  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.worldEnglish
    931·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
      2·
      2 months ago

      I’d argue that it should be seen by party rather than by individual. So the real lame duck period doesn’t start until it’s clear that the White House is about to change parties. This is much shorter (election in Nov, new Prez sworn in late Jan) and also covers the period major winter holidays (so don’t expect too much to get done).

    • ccunning@lemmy.world
      531·
      2 months ago

      By the article’s logic, every president elected to a second term has entered their lame duck phase the day after the election.

      • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
        2·
        2 months ago

        Came on just to say this. I’d argue that it’s by party rather than by individual, so with the Dems trying to get another term Biden has to be careful not to throw a spanner into the works for Harris.

      • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
        16·
        2 months ago

        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.

      • zigmus64@lemmy.world
        152·
        2 months ago

        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.

      • almar_quigley@lemmy.world
        11·
        2 months ago

        It’s like Christmas season. Soon the lame duck period will start before they even begin campaigning for their first term!