I should have come up with this quiz without a nudge from Ben Shapiro and Elon Musk, but I didn’t. I am ashamed.
Conservative gadfly and Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro called on President Trump to pardon Derek Chauvin, the white, former Minneapolis police officer who was convicted of murder in the 2020 death of George Floyd in a petition published on Shapiro’s website. (I don’t think it was murder, and I don’t think murder was ever proven, much less “beyond a reasonable doubt”.)
In his entreaty to the President, Shapiro declares, “We write to urge you to immediately issue a pardon for Officer Derek Chauvin, who was unjustly convicted and is currently serving a 22-and-a-half year sentence for the murder of George Floyd and associated federal charges.”
Shapiro accurately describes the incident as “the inciting event for the BLM riots,” which he says “set America’s race relations on their worst footing in recent memory.”
Most importantly, Shapiro says that the guilty verdict was tainted by the “massive overt pressure on the jury to return a guilty verdict regardless of the evidence or any semblance of impartial deliberation,” and that elected officials “pre-judged the outcome of the trial and took to national media to create pressure on the jury to go along with their preferred narrative.”
This, in my view, should be beyond dispute. I last posted on the way Chauvin was sacrificed in December of 2023, here. “Under these circumstances, there was no opportunity for blind justice to work, and a man is now rotting in prison because of it,” Shapiro concludes.
I concluded in part,
“The contrast between how Chauvin has been treated and the wall of protection erected around the black Capitol Hill cop who shot and killed an unarmed (white) January 7 rioter in 2021 is striking. From the beginning, the case against Chauvin lacked convincing intent, causation, or proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I keep seeing in various documentaries regarding other “true crime” stories rote statements by lawyers, prosecutors and judges about how in the United States, all citizens are presumed innocent and treated equally. If this equal treatment can be withheld from Derek Chauvin, and it has been, then it can and will be withheld by others who are deemed sufficiently unpopular. As [Professor Glenn] Loury writes, the result tells us that “the deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.” Who will challenge it now? Who has the integrity and courage today to stand up for justice a “racist” who was profitably used as the excuse to advance such marvelous revolutionary movements as critical race theory and “diversity, equity and inclusion”?
Chauvin was convicted in two separate trials, state and federal, and is simultaneously serving a 21-year federal sentence for violating Floyd’s civil rights along with a 22.5-year state sentence for second-degree murder. He has tried to appeal his conviction numerous times, including to the Supreme Court. He has no plausible avenues to pursue now except a pardon.
Shapiro argues in a video that although Trump cannot pardon Chauvin in the state murder case, it is important for Chauvin be pardoned on federal charges anyway.
“Make no mistake—the Derek Chauvin conviction represents the defining achievement of the Woke movement in American politics. The country cannot turn the page on that dark, divisive, and racist era without righting this terrible wrong,” Shapiro said in the letter. Elon Musk, not knowing when he should “tend to his own knitting,” posted about Shapiro’s petition on Twitter/X yesterday saying, “Something to think about.”
OK, I’m thinking.
Your first Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of March, 2025, is…
Should President Trump pardon Derek Chauvin?
My feelings on the matter…
1. I wish Shapiro hadn’t brought it up.
2. While I agree with Shapiro’s analysis, which is substantially the same as mine, and believe that in a vacuum, the just and fair result would be to pardon Chauvin, I do not think a Presidential pardon is the most ethical course.
3. I particularly believe this because Chauvin would remain in prison anyway.
A pardon would open up Trump once again to the Axis Big Lie (#4) that he is a racist white supremacist, and the average member of the public isn’t sophisticated enough or sufficiently informed about the George Floyd fiasco to know that there is no evidence that Floyd’s death was based on race. Chauvin was sacrificed to a mob, failed by the courts, and because he has been permanently cast as a symbol of a racist law enforcement system, there is no way to rehabilitate him now that won’t give the ruthless race-hustlers who launched the BLM riots another opportunity to roil and divide the nation. Far from “turning the page,” a pardon would guarantee that the propaganda would gain renewed momentum.
Trump’s Presidency is more important than Derek Chauvin. Pardoning him now, especially in what would be only a symbolic gesture, would jeopardize Trump’smission and agenda for a single man and a single miscarriage of justice. It would be irresponsible politically, and that means that the pardon would be unethical.
Muriel E. Bowser, the mayor of Washington, D.C., hinted yesterday that the giant Black Lives Matter mural that she had painted on a street within view of the White House in 2020 would finally be painted over. This is no time to give her second thoughts.
Ethics Alarms 
To say nothing of the fact that Chauvin opened himself up to this by his behavior when doing his job, antagonizing both white and black suspects. No proof of racism, but had he been a polite professional guy, it would have been harder to cast him as a goon.
And, no, he shouldn’t be in prison because he was a jerk cop, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles.
I agree with you, though, that he shouldn’t be pardoned. He was a sacrificial lamb for the MN court and he will have to be one now for President Trump. Hopefully, the President has an advisor(s) smart enough to make sure he doesn’t do it.
Maybe on his way out the door.
I took your words and rewrote them for Trump
Let Trump read this:
Ben Shapiro and others have petitioned for a pardon for Derek Chauvin on the Federal charges of violating George Floyd’s civil rights. There is no doubt that the events in question provided some with the excuse to burn and loot cities, attack federal buildings and carry on criminal behavior under the guise of protected free speech protests.
A pardon would open me up once again to the Axis big lie that I am a racist white supremacist, and unfortunately the average member of the public isn’t sophisticated enough or informed about the George Floyd fiasco to know that there is no evidence that Floyd’s death was based on race. Furthermore, a pardon would not provide Chauvin an escape from state charges. Unless the governor of Minnesota decides that he is entitled to a pardon there is little I can do to change Chauvin’s situation.
Chauvin was sacrificed to a mob, failed by the courts, and because he has been permanently cast as a symbol of a racist system, there is no way to rehabilitate him now that won’t give the ruthless race-hustlers who launched the BLM riots another opportunity to roil and divide the nation.
The presidency is more important than Derek Chauvin. Pardoning him now, especially in what would be only a symbolic gesture, would jeopardize our mission and agenda for a single man and a single miscarriage of justice. It would be irresponsible politically, and that means that the pardon would be unethical.
I can’t tell you how much I would love to be a speechwriter for Trump. Also a tweet-writer. I’d also like to look like George Clooney and have Madeleine Stowe worship the ground I walk on…
Ah, Madeleine Stowe. Indeed.
jvb
I wish you would write his stuff too. BTW Looks are not everything not that you are lacking in that department. Clooney can’t hold a candle to your depth and Stowe seems physically attractive enough but I have no idea if she is a decent human being and that is far more important than looks.
“and have Madeleine Stowe worship the ground I walk on…”
No disagreement there; she had me with Last Of The Mohicans, and Kevin Costner (to his…um…detriment) in Revenge;
But curious; were she not available, the substitute…?
PWS
What a vile, ugly movie “Revenge” is. Unwatchable.
Stowe’s back-up would probably be Jennifer Connolly.
I agree with your analysis, Jack, but the bigger problem I have is that Chauvin pled guilty to the federal case:
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-minneapolis-police-officer-derek-chauvin-pleads-guilty-federal-court-depriving-george
That is certainly not to say that he might still be innocent (innocent people plead guilty sometimes), but a pardon on those charges would seem far less appropriate. To be honest, though, I have not looked at the federal charges and exactly what he admitted he did. It might be that he was actually guilty of violating Floyd’s civil rights. I have not done that analysis. But, the fact of the guilty plea itself would make me more reluctant to overturn the federal conviction than the state one (not that Trump has that authority).
-Jut
As usual, EA has a commenter of counsel in the jurisdiction reporting on the issue at hand.
What happened to Derek Chauvin was a terrible travesty of justice and something needs to be done to correct the injustice.
As I wrote back in October 2022, I think Derek Chauvin should be “vanished into a Federal witness protection program where he will be given a new identity” and relocate him outside the fifty USA states. The U.S. Marshals Service could secretly have him “transferred” out of prison, give him a new identity, grow a beard and a full head of hair, buy him a nice size new boat to use for charter fishing, buy him a nice little private place to live in up Route 005 in Pago Pago American Samoa. Trump could pardon him on is last day in office and he could live out his life away from the hate filled racist in the USA that will never forget is face and would rather see him be dead than be free.
Give this man some peace elsewhere in the world because there is no freaking way he’ll be able to live in peace in these fifty United States.
I think that answers your question.
I liked it.
jvb
If they can do that then he’ll I’ll take that deal. A fishing charter boat income with my Soc Sec would be just fine with me.
Can we have a discussion about prosecution for “violating civil rights”? It smells of a vile version of “the government must do something”; political persecution for someone predetermined to be guilty and must be punished. Why were there federal charges at all, especially in this case? Why weren’t the state charges enough?
Yes, Chauvin is a despicable person and should have been removed from the police force long before this, but it feels like an attempt to put a veil of respectability over judicial action that wouldn’t feel out of place in China or North Korea.
You are right, of course. I am hoping eventually SCOTUS rules that these “civil rights” prosecutions are violations of double jeopardy: this is how the feds got the Rodney King cops after they had been acquitted of state charges.
Unlikely, the doctrine of double sovereignty has been in place for decades. The civil Rights prosecutions were created to make sure that Southern racists would not escape Justice because they knew the prosecutors and judges and the jury was almost always all white. However, that’s no longer an issue, or at least not the issue that it was, so I would not mind seeing a limitation on these prosecutions to when there has been an obvious miscarriage of Justice.
These statements here that one man must suffer for the good of the nation sound all well and good, and there may even be a sound basis for them. All the same, it kind of sucks if you are that one man.
Wait, doing the right thing, is the wrong thing? If these violations of civil rights cases are often double jeopardy, wouldn’t the ethical thing be to pardon him and to hell with the consequences? It’s okay because he was a shitty human? I am hearing a huge amount of Humanahumana here, folks.
The President should discard Ben Shapiro’s advice. POTUS has to deal with multiple conflicting ethical concerns, some of these weightier than the civil rights of one citizen.
Concern number one is racial relationships in the USA. These have been deteriorating in the 21st century, and current political climate gives me the impression that we are just about to turn the corner, given the fact that one political party is loosing the lockdown on the votes of particular racial demographics. My fear is that pardoning Chauvin will set back racial relations for decades.
Concern number true is the tranquility of the Republic. This should always be a concern for any President. I do not think we should risk riots like we saw in 2020 (with multiple fatalities) for the freedom of Derek Chauvin.
So we should not narrowly focus on just Derek Chauvin as I believe that the two other concerns should weigh heavier. Add to that that I do not feel particularly charitable to Chauvin, as his actions were the trigger for social unrest and decline of racial relations. So he has to take his punishment for the good of the nation.
I think Jack said the same thing. The problem I have with this argument is that the race hucksters set back race relations by lionizing George Floyd. Are we to always be held hostage to the threat of riots? I hope not
Not Jennifer but Bridget Moynahan….