A defense lawyer just asked President Trump for a pardon the Constitution does not allow in this state case.
Story Snapshot
- Lindsay Clancy’s attorney publicly asked President Trump to pardon her after a mistrial.
- The judge declared a mistrial because jurors were deadlocked, not because charges were dropped.
- Presidential pardons apply only to federal crimes, not state cases like this one.
- The request highlights confusion about mistrials and clemency limits under the Constitution.
Attorney’s Televised Pardon Appeal
Attorney Kevin Reddington asked President Trump on national television to pardon his client, Lindsay Clancy, days after her murder trial ended without a verdict. Reddington made the plea during a Good Morning America interview, saying he hoped Trump would consider what Clancy has endured and grant a pardon. The public appeal followed intense coverage of the case and the split jury. The defense has also signaled interest in talks with local prosecutors about next steps in the case.
President Trump has not announced any action in response to Reddington’s request, and the appeal itself does not carry legal force. Lawyers sometimes use public statements to build sympathy or signal a desired outcome. This ask stood out because it targeted the White House rather than state officials. That choice matters because the case was brought in Massachusetts court, under state law, and not in federal court. That sets clear limits on presidential power here.
What The Mistrial Actually Means
The judge declared a mistrial after jurors reported they could not reach a unanimous decision. The court transcript records the judge stating the jury was deadlocked and that a mistrial would be declared. A mistrial means the trial ended without a verdict. It does not decide guilt or innocence, and it does not erase the charges. Prosecutors can often try the case again, or they may seek another resolution, depending on the evidence and public interest.
People often confuse mistrial with acquittal, but they are very different outcomes. An acquittal ends the case and bars retrial. A mistrial resets the process and leaves options open. In high-profile cases, a mistrial can shift pressure onto both sides. Prosecutors must assess whether to retry and how to seat a new jury. The defense can seek a deal, a dismissal, or changes to future jury selection. None of those choices involve federal clemency.
Why A Presidential Pardon Would Not Apply
The Constitution limits presidential pardons to “Offences against the United States,” which are federal crimes. The Department of Justice explains that the President’s clemency power does not reach state offenses prosecuted in state courts. Legal guides from Congress and major legal groups restate this boundary. Governors and state boards handle state clemency. That is why a White House pardon would not cover the charges in this Massachusetts case.
Governor Maura Healey declined to say whether she would pardon Lindsay Clancy after the Duxbury mother's attorney made a public appeal to President Trump to pardon his client. https://t.co/lBdwzszfUG
— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) September 8, 2026
This boundary reflects federalism, the split of power between the national government and the states. The Supreme Court has also described the pardon power as broad yet limited to federal crimes. In practice, defense teams who seek mercy in state cases must petition the governor or a state clemency board. When attorneys ask a president to step into a state case, the effect is usually symbolic. It aims to shape public opinion, not to trigger a direct legal fix.
Sources:
nypost.com, abcnews.com, npr.org, rev.com, yahoo.com, abc7ny.com
