Americans on both aisles of the political spectrum were shocked to learn of Donald Trump’s commutation of George Santos’s sentencing, a move that continues the president’s agenda of freeing political allies.
Headlines were made worldwide after disgraced representative George Santos (R-NY) walked free after serving just three months of his seven-year sentence. The turn of events came after President Trump’s commutation of the former politician’s sentence.
President Trump stated on Truth Social, following the commutation that “George Santos was somewhat of a ‘rogue,’ but there are many rogues throughout our Country that aren’t forced to serve seven years in prison. At least Santos had the Courage, Conviction and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN! George has been in solitary confinement for long stretches of time and, by all accounts, has been horribly mistreated. Therefore, I just signed a Commutation, releasing George Santos from prison, IMMEDIATELY. Good luck George, have a great life!”
The release of Santos has stirred political controversy as people assess Trump’s usage of presidential powers amidst nationwide turmoil and debate. What was Santos even sentenced to seven years for? Is it in Trump’s legal power to commute Santos’s sentence? How does this action compare to previous incidents of commutation?
First, George Santos’s convictions trace primarily to his 2022 bid for a position as a House Representative in New York’s Third Congressional District. Alongside his treasurer, Santos committed fraud through the submission of deceitful reports to the Federal Election Committee (FEC).
The National Republican Congressional Committee’s (NRCC) Young Guns program aims to provide funding for qualifying Republican political bids. Among these qualifying factors would be a campaign’s ability to raise more than $250,000 prior to application.
During the 2022 election cycle, the FEC would receive word that George Santos’s campaign had met this benchmark through donations. These amounts, ranging upwards of $500k, were sent by individuals like Santos himself, qualifying him for NRCC funding.
It would be revealed, however, that these numbers were fabricated. Santos didn’t have the funds necessary to receive funding, and he himself only held $8,000 in his personal bank accounts, a stark difference from the $500k he reportedly donated himself.
Besides this damning revelation, other allegations were made against the disgraced representative. Besides taking advantage of Republican funds, Santos allegedly defrauded unemployment programs of $24,000 during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite having been steadily employed throughout the time period.
Santos was also found to have stolen the identities of numerous campaign contributors, whose credit cards he used. Again, his misleading reports to the FEC, alongside the targeting of the elderly, allowed him to continue his crimes for a prolonged period of time.
Duly, on April 25, 2025, George Santos was sentenced on counts of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft and sentenced to a total of 87 months in prison.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the American Constitution states that the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” What does this mean?
By the doctrines of the Constitution, the President of the United States has the authority to pardon and commute sentences for Americans for their crimes. The Supreme Court has recognized this power to be unlimited, extending to all known offenses, being usable before, during or after one’s trial, and adjusting one’s sentence as seen fit by the president, from being reduced to fully commuted, as was the case for George Santos.
The clause in the Constitution does highlight two key limitations to this power, however. First, the crimes a sitting president can pardon must be against the United States as a whole, not individual states or foreign nations. Secondly, the president cannot provide clemency to one in the process of impeachment.
George Santos’s crimes were neither directed towards a particular state nor were they committed in relation to an impeachment. Bearing these factors in mind, President Trump’s commutation of his sentence is fully within his legal powers as Commander-in-Chief.
Accordingly, each president has had a history of pardoning Americans and commuting their sentences during his term(s). President Obama granted hundreds of pardons and commutations during his two terms spanning 2009-2017. Convictions reprieved pertained to offenses in relation to drugs, as well as the leakage of classified information.
President Biden followed a similar suit, granting pardons and commutations largely to those convicted of drug-related offenses. The former president made history through his usage of mass clemency, commuting the sentences of nearly 1,500 people in December 2024. More controversial was his pardoning of his own son, Hunter Biden, of charges related to taxes and gun possession. The move was criticized for the blatant bias in Biden’s usage of presidential powers.
President Trump has granted his fair share of presidential clemency as well. His pardons throughout his 2017-2021 term particularly targeted those convicted of fraud, among other crimes.
More controversial than his first term choices, however, were the initial pardons and commutations in his second term for participants in the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot. In total, more than 1,500 rioters received clemency, sparking outrage over the intentions of the president’s use of power.
California congressional representative Nancy Pelosi denounced the pardons and commutations, stating that they were “an outrageous insult to our justice system and the heroes who suffered physical scars and emotional trauma as they protected the Capitol, the Congress and the Constitution.”
Bellevue College political science professor Clifford Cawthon provided his personal insight into the subject in an interview with The Watchdog.
Cawthon argued that the commutation of the Jan. 6 rioters and George Santos highlights the hypocrisy of the current administration, citing the president’s ongoing usage of the National Guard in his crackdown on national crime.
Ultimately, the professor argued that, “The commuting of George Santos’s sentence is a mockery of both those who have been unjustly convicted or faced dubious convictions and, more importantly, is politically motivated, and that should concern anyone who’s concerned with our law.”
With news sources on all sides of the political spectrum, from CNN to BBC, and even FOX News releasing a scathing article of the decision to commute George Santos’s sentencing, it is undeniable that President Trump’s actions are widely unpopular, to say the least.
The question remains, however: without violating the statutes of presidential powers, is our president truly a concern to the foundations of American politics?
