I think  that one can make a case that a presidential self-pardon would violate the oath of office and the obligation to take care that laws be faithfully executed. Also, a pardon must be received. Can someone both give and receive in the same action, other than the thrower of a boomerang?

I’d love to see a constitutional amendment that would forbid presidential pardons, amnesty or commutations of sentences to anyone elected to federal office, or appointed as an officer of the United States— civil or military -- subject to Senate confirmation.

That would restore the idea that the pardon power was for common criminals as an act of clemency, or to rebels as a strategic approach to get them to lay down arms (Alexander Hamilton’s thought), but not to treasonous military officers.

Otherwise, a pardon power used within an administration is an open invitation to make the top officials above the law, and to offer opportunities to the president that should be closed off.

Richard Pious, a political scientist, is Adolph and Effie Ochs Professor Emeritus at Barnard College (part of Columbia University) and at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at Columbia University. He is the author of Why Presidents Fail (2008) and The Constitution Under Siege (2010)