When President Donald Trump issued pardons to numerous Republican Party officials, lawyers and activists who tried to help him overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, he also may have inadvertently included one man who committed voter fraud on his behalf. Now, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) editorial board is questioning the implications of that defendant's accepting of the pardon.
On Tuesday, the paper said Trump's pardons suggest he has "thrown legal caution to the wind," and warned him that those winds "can blow in unexpected directions." The WSJ compared Trump to former President Joe Biden in labeling his his pardons as "capacious and unconditional."
The conservative editorial board noted that Trump had "no power" to dismiss most of those cases, which are being handled by various state officials, making the pardons "symbolic." And while the pardons were largely for members of his legal team like former New York City Mayor Rudi Giuliani and attorneys like John Eastman and Sidney Powell, one of the people who indirectly received a pardon in an ongoing federal case is Matthew Laiss.
As Votebeat reported, Laiss moved from Pennsylvania to Florida in August of 2020 and cast ballots for Trump in both states, voting in-person in Florida and casting a mail-in ballot in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Laiss' attorney has argued that because Trump's clemency announcement grants "a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to all United States citizens" for 2020 election misconduct, Laiss qualifies for the pardon.
"By its plain language, the pardon extends to Mr. Laiss," the man's attorney wrote in a court filing. "He hereby accepts the pardon."
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania charged Laiss with voter fraud, and he has pleaded not guilty. The Trump administration has until Friday to clarify whether its pardon extends to him. Federal prosecutors told the judge overseeing the case that it is currently "consulting with Department of Justice [DOJ] attorneys in Washington, D.C." about Laiss' case.
The Journal predicted that other 2020 voter fraud defendants are likely paying close attention to how the DOJ responds.
Click here to read the WSJ's editorial in full (subscription required).