State Prosecution as a Solution to Presidential Pardons

Tim Wu, a law professor at Columbia and contributing opinion writer, addresses recent actions taken by President Trump, particularly the controversial pardon of Stephen Buyer. Buyer, a former Indiana congressman, was convicted of insider trading in 2023. Wu highlights the troubling pattern of presidential pardons for wealthy and well-connected individuals who have supported Trump’s re-election or paid substantial sums for political influence.

Trump’s discretionary use of the pardon power raises concerns about its implications, creating the perception that the president’s allies operate above the law. Despite the broad discretion of this power, Wu argues that states can take actionable steps. States have the authority to prosecute individuals for conduct violating state laws, even if the federal government has issued a pardon.

The case of Joseph Schwartz serves as a notable example. Schwartz, involved in fraudulent activities in a nursing home empire, was pardoned federally by Trump after pleading guilty to tax crimes. However, Schwartz faced state-level prosecution in Arkansas for Medicaid fraud and tax evasion. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin ensured Schwartz completed his sentence in state prison and imposed over $1 million in restitution and fees on him.

Schwartz’s activities negatively affected other states too, suggesting the potential for further accountability. Wu also mentions Trevor Milton, convicted of defrauding investors in 2022 and pardoned in 2025. Given that Milton’s company, Nikola, was based in Arizona, Wu suggests that Arizona could investigate and prosecute Milton under state fraud laws.

These examples demonstrate that state-level actions can address issues that arise when federal pardons are granted in controversial circumstances. By leveraging their legal powers, states can ensure justice and uphold the rule of law.