4 hours ago, JerryM said:

The SCOTUS might very well want to hear such arguments AFTER a person or persons have been indicted on Federal criminal counts and those criminal indictments have been argued and lost by the person(s) so indicted at the district and federal appeals level.

The government cannot appeal a lost criminal trial.

A person or organization of standing may appeal the application of a pardon on the grounds it was unconstitutional, perhaps by example on the basis of a pardon being used to perpetuate or solicit crimes.

Pardons can’t be revoked or overturned by later presidents. Because the president’s authority to issue pardons is explicitly laid out in the Constitution – where it says the president ‘shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment’ – significant changes to curtail the presidential clemency power would require a constitutional amendment.

https://www.ibanet.org/US-Presidency-Latest-pardons-cause-serious-rule-of-law-concerns

But there is this:

https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-cohen-reintroduces-amendment-constitution-clarify-and-limit

17 hours ago, ravip said:

He is the smartest and the bravest Prez the US could ever find

Dodging the draft with fake bone spurs is brave? Getting the Strait of Hormuz closed is smart?

In suppose one could say he is smarter than the people who support him, but that's a very low bar.

45 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Dodging the draft with fake bone spurs is brave? Getting the Strait of Hormuz closed is smart?

In suppose one could say he is smarter than the people who support him, but that's a very low bar.

Sorry, you missed the sarcasm there.

5 minutes ago, ravip said:

Sorry, you missed the sarcasm there.

indeed I did.