Consider the Presidential Pardon....

I believe the concept is sound. But, a significant loophole was made evident through the Scooter Libby pardon. Being a member of the executive branch, Libby did the bidding of the vice president. Richard Armitage (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Armitage) was the actual "leaker", but didn't face criminal charges. Regardless of the actual leadership behind his decision to leak the information, any member of the Executive Branch has the pre-destined potential to avoid any consequences of their actions due to the power of the Presidential Pardon. Is this an acceptable, broad-stroke option for a country operated by the rule of law?

Take this to an extreme (that we might see in totalitarian regimes): The president orders that someone be killed. No record of the order is made. Operatives carry out the murder. One of the operatives is caught. During the trial no evidence is found or presented about the president's order, and the operative knows that he will not go to jail, so he is forthcoming about his personal motives. After the news subsides, the president 'takes pity' on his operative and provides a pardon. Ergo, the Law is circumvented.

I propose that the option of a Presidential Pardon be excluded from anyone operating within the Executive Branch. It's a risk you take when working for the President.

"Currently, the only way to change the pardon power is by constitutional amendment, though history has shown that the scope of the power can be modified by the courts (as in the acceptance doctrine)." (http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_pard.html)

We have a horrible loophole in our Constitution that should be filled quickly. We need an amendment to the Constitution to limit the Executive Branch's ability to self-pardon and thus circumvent the law.

Aug.5th, 2008. New development: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12308.html