Barbour causes statewide controversy with midnight pardons

At the end of his tenure as governor, Hayley Barbour pardoned 200 felons as one of his last official acts. This act, uncommon on such a large scale, will likely have far-reaching implications on Mississippi’s constitutional rules regarding pardons. On top of that, Atty. Gen. Jim Hood believes that at least 156 of the pardons do not meet constitutional requirements and has launched an investigation.

The original hearing on whether or not all but 21 of the full pardons are legal was originally scheduled for Monday, Jan. 23, but it has been moved to Friday, Feb. 3, because more time was needed to cover the numerous pardons, according to the state attorny general’s office.

Marvin King, Jr., a political science professor at the University of Mississippi, admitted that determining whether all the pardons are legal is a tough call, but he said he believes Barbour had wide latitude in his decision.

“My understanding is that he had pretty blanketed provisions for doing this in the state constitution,” King said. “So while it might seem unpopular, I’m not sure it’s actually illegal.”

King was quick to point out that in the end, the courts will decide whether Barbour actually had the power to do what he did.

“People are often swayed by their emotions on issues like this, but the court should just rely on the facts of the case,” he said.

Two possibly bigger issues than the actual validity of the pardons are how the state’s constitution may be changed and how Barbour’s legacy will be affected.

Newly elected Gov. Phil Bryant has condemned the majority of the pardons and said that he will seek to change the laws necessary so this act by a governor cannot be done easily again.

King said he expects the future will bring new rules regarding pardoning abilities of the governor.

“The major effect may be that no future governor will have such a blank slate when it comes to pardons,” he said.

Amending the constitution of Mississippi is not too hard, according to King, but it is a lengthy process. One possibility King proposes is having a parole board or other state agency approve pardons, which would prevent pardons from occurring on such a massive scale.

“Clearly, what Haley Barbour did on this issue was kind of extreme,” he said.

Justin Sanders, a public policy leadership junior from Madison, said he sees this extreme act as one congruent with Barbour’s political dealings.

“I think that these pardons and the whole scandal (have) been indicative of the way that Barbour’s administration has dealt with people in Mississippi,” he said. “It has always been an afterthought as to the public’s true reaction or what people really care about what he was doing.”

King, however, said he believes this last act will not stain Barbour’s political legacy.

“It won’t be his defining legacy,” he said. “In the history books, Katrina will be what he is remembered for.”

Sanders predicted that beyond any effect on Barbour’s legacy, the real problem will be giving the nation one more reason to view Mississippi as the laughingstock of the country.

“It’s just one more national news story that makes Mississippi look stupid,” he said.

All predictions on the pardon rulings will be determined next Friday. After that, the state constitution will likely be the next focus before the lengthy debate on Barbour’s final act in office is settled.