In 2021, a federal appeals court stated that 1LT Clint Lorance’s acceptance of a pardon from former President Donald Trump did not constitute a confession of guilt that would bar him from challenging his convictions for murdering two Afghan civilians. The Lorance v. Commandant decision from the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is now being cited as precedent in other federal civilian appellate courts.
“We consider the Lorance approach potentially to be valid. Foster’s loss of VA benefits due to his violation of the condition challenged in his petition may be an ongoing collateral consequence that prevents this case from being moot. In the absence of briefing from the government, though, we do not make such a holding. This will be an issue for the district court to consider after briefing on remand.”
According to a Reuters report, “The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in favor of former First Lieutenant Clint Lorance appeared to mark the first time a federal appeals court has ever decided whether accepting a presidential pardon amounts to a legal confession of guilt.”
“the pardon was instead merely agnostic as to Lorance’s guilt, not purporting to speak to guilt or innocence (Reuters).”
– Senior U.S. Circuit Judge David Ebel
Read both decisions citing precedent here:
UAP supports American servicemembers by generating Presidential, Congressional, and public awareness and funding the legal representation used to fight their legal battles. Your financial support is critical to our success, and most importantly, the success of our Warriors!
