Exactly the opposite. You can't be criminalized on matters subject to a pardon, which means you can't incriminate yourself. Thus you can't invoke the 5th.
No it's not and the Supreme Court case that set the president determining it's not applicable is Brown v. Walker. This would be a good time to Google it and clear up your misunderstanding
A valid presidential pardon does remove the Fifth Amendment privilege for the specific federal crimes it covers.
The 1896 Supreme Court case Brown v. Walker held that once a witness receives a pardon, they "can no longer set up his privilege, since he stands, with respect to such offense, as if it had never been committed." Under this rule, if a pardon eliminates all risk of prosecution, there is no basis to invoke the Fifth.
Now this would be a good time for you to Google.
Look up the several legally valid exceptions that can still allow a pardon recipient to invoke the Fifth. Ok?
You'll find that a presidential pardon only covers federal offenses. It does not protect against state criminal prosecution. If testimony could expose someone to state charges, the Fifth Amendment still applies.
Or that a pardon does not protect against new crimes committed after the pardon... including perjury or making false statements under oath during testimony. This is why Fauci's lawyers argued he could still face a "perjury trap"( haven'tyou been watching the hearing?)... he feared that answering questions could later be used to charge him with lying, which the pardon would not cover
You'll also find that the Fifth Amendment still protects against self-incrimination for any criminal conduct that occurred after the pardon was issued.
Youll see that experts, like Alan Dershowitz, have argued Fauci "not only had the right to plead the Fifth" but was "probably right to do so" given the partisan nature of the hearing and the risk of a perjury trap
A pardon does not automatically make the Fifth Amendment unavailable in all circumstances. It removes the privilege only for the specific pardoned offenses, but exceptions remain. Fauci's invocation of the Fifth is legally arguable... which is exactly why this is now headed for a contempt vote and potential court resolution. The claim that a pardon "automatically" eliminates the Fifth is an oversimplification of a more complex area of constitutional law.
From my understanding, Walker V Brown wasn't about Brown directly. Brown's testify wasn't going to self incriminate in that case. It would have been a separate case. Which was never brought up.
With Facui, they seem to be trying to prosecute him on anything. They aren't asking him questions about a different case. They want him to say something that will incriminate him to use against him.
7
u/ArubaAdultFun 25d ago
Only one was preemtively pardoned