In a 6-to-3
decision, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that pardon procedures lay
outside of its constitutional authority—that to interfere even in cases where
those procedures were flouted would violate the separation of powers. Section
124 of Mississippi’s Constitution “gives pardon power exclusively to the
governor, but also requires applicants to have their petitions for pardon
‘published for 30 days, in some newspaper in the county where the crime was
committed.’”[1] This is constitutional language, and yet the Supreme Court refused
to determine whether Haley Barbour had acted unconstitutionally in all but 22
of the 200 pardons he had granted in his last days in office. In other words,
the Court’s function in interpreting the constitution is at odds with the
principle wherein the three branches of the Mississippi government are
separate—none being directed by any of the other two.
The full essay is at "Pardons in Mississippi."
