Lawfare Podcast Daily: "Patronage Pardons" with Prof. Lee Kovarsky

Release Date: February 27, 2026
Host: Roger Parloff, Senior Editor at Lawfare, with Ben Wittes
Guest: Prof. Lee Kovarsky, University of Texas School of Law
Episode Focus: An in-depth conversation on ‘patronage pardons,’ a novel concept pioneered by Professor Kovarsky to describe a feature of the Trump administration's approach to presidential clemency.

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the evolving—and, in many ways, unprecedented—use of the presidential pardon power by Donald Trump, particularly as it has shifted from historically private or shameful acts of clemency to a deliberate, public communication designed to reward, incentivize, and protect political loyalty and future criminality. Professor Lee Kovarsky presents and discusses his new article, “Patronage Pardons” (Duke Law Journal), explaining the concept, its constitutional context, historical precedents (or lack thereof), and implications for the American justice system.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Defining "Patronage Pardons"

• Concept: A “patronage pardon” isn’t simply a traditional act of mercy for someone punished, but a form of political communication—a ‘loyalty for protection racket’ intended to shield allies and signal incentives to those considering transgressive acts in service of the president. (05:57)
  • Quote: “...it also operates as a form of communication to people who might be contemplating transgression on behalf of the president’s behalf...” — Lee Kovarsky [02:57]
• Function: These pardons not only excuse but may induce criminality and other misconduct undertaken on the president's behalf. (03:46)

2. Historical Context and Constitutional Foundation

• Constitutional Authority: Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 grants the president broad "clemency power"—including pardons, commutations, reprieves, and fine reductions. (05:17)
  • Quote: “The pardon clause... is understood as vesting in the president clemency power.” — Lee Kovarsky [05:17]
• Framers’ Concerns: The founders were aware of possible abuse, expecting political checks (shame, impeachment), which have eroded in hyper-polarized times. (06:11)
  • Quote: “...if a president was really going to use pardon power to advertise his willingness to support people committing offenses... there would be shame and infamy in that and there would be an impeachment. Of course, that assumes a set of political circumstances that don’t obtain anymore.” — Lee Kovarsky [06:11]

3. Contrast with Past Presidential Pardons

• Earlier pardon controversies (e.g., Clinton’s Mark Rich) were typically secretive, embarrassing—"moments of shame" rather than public policy. Trump’s approach is fundamentally different in its open, strategic signaling. (09:12, 13:08)

4. Key Case Studies: Trump’s Patronage Pardons

a. Joe Arpaio (First Trump Pardon) [10:44–13:29]

• Background: Pardoned for criminal contempt after disregarding court orders not to racially profile or harass suspected undocumented immigrants. (11:10)
• Significance: Trump’s intent was public and communicative: “Hey, do what Joe did, and there’s a pardon waiting for you...” — Lee Kovarsky [11:10]
• Memorable Analogy: Kovarsky likens Trump’s approach to the raptors in Jurassic Park: “...it kind of felt like that was Trump being the Raptor, testing the fence and kind of seeing what he could get away with...” [11:10]

b. Scooter Libby [13:32–15:58]

• Background: Libby’s sentence was commuted by Bush, not pardoned (which caused a rift with Cheney). Trump later issued a full pardon, claiming he’d been “treated very badly.”
• Timing & Message: Issued during the Mueller investigation—clearly meant to signal to potential witnesses/allies like Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and Mike Flynn.
  • Quote: “The message to them was unmistakable. This isn’t some paranoid interpretation... People who were opponents and allies of the President all read it the exact same way at the time.” — Lee Kovarsky [15:46]
  • Quote: “Stay quiet. Stay quiet. You’ll get your pardon.” — Lee Kovarsky [15:49]

c. January 6th Insurrectionists [16:06–19:06]

• Scope: On his first day in his second term, Trump issued clemency to virtually all January 6th offenders—with a handful of exceptions (commutations instead of pardons).
• Intended Effect: Acts as a public advertisement of “protection waiting... at the end of any adverse criminal consequence” for those acting in Trump’s interest/movement. (16:29)
  • Quote: “...he wanted to do this quickly and publicly again to communicate to people who might contemplate transgression... that if they align themselves with MAGA, then there is protection waiting for them...” — Lee Kovarsky [01:40, 16:29]

d. Other Transactional Pardons [19:21–21:20]

• Pardon grants act as a public loyalty-reward system—ranging from pardons secured for financial support to transactional deals with specific communities (e.g., Libertarians, the crypto community).
• Quote: “It’s always the pardonee’s mother gave a $1 million donation or, you know... in order to transactionally secure that support, he very publicly pardons Ross Ulbricht.” — Lee Kovarsky [21:12]

e. "No MAGA Left Behind" Slogan [29:10–31:42]

• Trump-appointed pardon attorney Ed Martin popularized the phrase with Twitter posts, underlining the new, explicit loyalty-driven logic. (29:36)
• Notable Moment: “That’s Trump using the power to say to people... they weren’t going to leave any MAGA behind.” — Lee Kovarsky [29:36]

5. Impact on Government and Legal Culture

• Behavioral Effects: The steady promise of a pardon undermines enforcement and emboldens further rule-breaking by administration allies, confident they’ll be shielded. (15:17, 33:49)
  • Quote: “...none of these people are all that worried about disobeying court orders, about ignoring rules... because they know they’re going to get a blanket pardon...” — Lee Kovarsky [02:15, 33:49]
• Combined with DOJ Weaponization: Pardons reinforce a broader “reward friends, punish enemies” approach, including the refusal or targeting of prosecutions depending on political allegiance. (31:51)

6. Accelerants Making Patronage Pardons Worse [35:05–40:27]

• Political Polarization: Diminishes any realistic prospect of political accountability or impeachment. (35:05)
  • Quote: “...the electorate is so polarized. And so almost every action undertaken by the administration is zero sum...” — Lee Kovarsky [35:05]
• SCOTUS Immunity Decisions: Trump v. United States effectively immunizes presidents for how they wield pardon power. (36:51)
  • Quote: “No matter what happens, you can’t face any criminal or civil liability for use of the pardon power...” — Lee Kovarsky [36:51]
• Leverage Spiral: Each transgression increases presidential leverage over allies, making further criminality more likely as the stakes and desperation grow. (39:36)
  • Quote: “More crime begets more leverage, which begets more crime, which begets more leverage. And you see where this is going...” — Lee Kovarsky [39:36]

7. Possible Solutions and Limits [40:27–45:36]

• Constitutional Amendment: Unrealistic (“not even worth talking about”). (40:36)
• State Prosecutions: Protect/encourage states to prosecute loyalist misconduct, as federal pardons cannot cover state crimes. (40:36–42:40)
• D.C. Specifics: Trump controls D.C. prosecutions (including local offenses), so civil enforcement or conspiracy prosecutions in other states may be necessary as alternatives. (42:50–45:36)

8. Enduring Effects & Looking Forward [45:36–47:15]

• Presidential Power “Accretes”: Once boundary-breaking use of the pardon is normalized, successors might not be as brazen as Trump, but the expanded scope is unlikely to disappear. (45:45)
  • Quote: “But I do think that sort of more adventurous use of the pardon power is here to stay.” — Lee Kovarsky [45:45]

9. Non-Trump Examples

• Biden’s Pardons: Examples such as his pardon for his son or the “prospective” pardons for COVID-19-era officials lack the communicative, loyalty-inducing element and therefore are not “patronage pardons” in this sense. (47:45)
  • Quote: “It wasn’t a patronage pardon… it doesn’t have that communicative function.” — Lee Kovarsky [47:45]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the unique shift under Trump:
  “What’s different about the Trump administration is he is advertising this pardon for transgression exchange in ways that were sort of unthinkable in a different political environment.” — Lee Kovarsky [09:12]

• On the Arpaio pardon as signaling:
  “In effect, was saying to law enforcement along the southern border, like, hey, do what Joe did, and there’s a pardon waiting for you at the end of any adverse legal action.” — Lee Kovarsky [11:10]

• On the "No MAGA Left Behind" slogan:
  “That’s Trump using the power to say to people... they weren’t going to leave any MAGA behind.” — Lee Kovarsky [29:36]

• On the self-perpetuating risk:
  “Desperation is dangerous.” — Lee Kovarsky [40:27]

Key Timestamps

• Definition & Constitutional Context: 02:57–06:11
• Contrasting Historical Pardons: 09:12–13:08
• Joe Arpaio Pardon: 10:44–13:08
• Scooter Libby & Mueller Investigation: 13:32–15:58
• January 6th Pardons: 16:06–19:06
• Transactional/Other Pardons: 19:21–21:20
• "No MAGA Left Behind" & Ed Martin: 29:10–31:42
• Impact on Administration Behavior: 33:13–34:58
• Accelerants Discussion: 35:05–40:27
• Possible Remedies: 40:27–45:36
• Long-term Outlook: 45:36–47:15

Concluding Thoughts

Professor Kovarsky delivers a trenchant, well-documented diagnosis of how the Trump era redefined and weaponized the pardon power—moving from acts of private shame to public, systemic incentives for lawbreaking in service of a political movement. The pattern likely sets a durable—if troubling—precedent for future presidencies, with solutions hindered by polarization and structural limits.

Look for Prof. Lee Kovarsky’s article, “Patronage Pardons,” in an upcoming issue of the Duke Law Journal.