\n<\/p>\n
Amid a flurry<\/span> of pardons President Donald Trump issued to white-collar criminals last week<\/a>, one name that has largely escaped notice did not belong to a person at all.<\/p>\n In what may have been a first, Trump pardoned a corporation. The company to earn that distinction was a cryptocurrency exchange sentenced to a $100 million fine for violating an anti-money laundering law.<\/p>\n \u201cAs far as I know, the president has never granted a full pardon to a corporation.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n The move surprised scholars of presidential pardons, which have traditionally been considered the domain of human beings<\/a>. Several experts contacted by The Intercept said Trump appears to have acted within his powers, but they were unaware of any prior instances of corporations granted full pardons.<\/p>\n \u201cThere have been plenty of cases where presidents have remitted fines or forfeitures or something else like that,\u201d said Margaret Love, who served as U.S. pardon attorney from 1990 to 1997. \u201cAs far as I know, the president has never granted a full pardon to a corporation.\u201d<\/p>\n One longtime critic of the federal government\u2019s lenient approach to corporate crime said Trump\u2019s pardon sent a dangerous message.<\/p>\n \u201cPutting corporate pardons on the table strengthens Trump\u2019s corrupt and authoritarian power over corporations,\u201d said Rick Claypool, research director for consumer advocacy group Public Citizen\u2019s president\u2019s office. \u201cThis has the potential to trigger a lobbying frenzy for any corporation that has faced federal enforcement.\u201d<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s pardon of HDR Global Trading, the owner and operator of crypto exchange BitMEX, was issued at the same time as pardons for three of the company\u2019s co-founders and one of its employees.<\/p>\n Just like people, corporations can be convicted of crimes. While they cannot be sentenced to prison, they can face fines and serious consequences such as being barred from federal contracts.<\/p>\n The company and the four employees, including influential Bitcoin booster Arthur Hayes<\/a>, pleaded guilty to violating the Bank Secrecy Act, which requires businesses to take steps to prevent money laundering.<\/p>\n Prosecutors said the company pretended to pull out of the U.S. market to avoid complying with the law, but knew its withdrawal was nothing more than a \u201csham,\u201d<\/a> even seeking out U.S.-based influencers to market its platform.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n HDR Global Trading is incorporated in the Seychelles, an Indian Ocean island nation that has been dubbed a tax haven <\/a>by the Tax Justice Network.<\/p>\n The company pleaded guilty last July. Two months ago, a federal judge handed it a $100 million fine and two years\u2019 probation. The fine was supposed to be paid within 60 days of the judgment\u2019s entry into the court record. The company said it had not paid the fine before receiving the pardon. The timing of Trump\u2019s pardon means the company avoided the fine deadline by hours.<\/p>\n BitMEX says it still bars U.S. citizens from using its services<\/a>. In a statement, the company thanked Trump.<\/p>\n \u201cThe BitMEX platform will continue to lead the market as the safest, most trusted, financially-stable, and professionally operated crypto derivatives exchange, employing new products and innovations month by month to many satisfied users,\u201d the company said.<\/p>\n If the company had paid the judgment, legal scholars said, there would be no refund.<\/p>\n Under 1877 Supreme Court precedent<\/a>, the president\u2019s pardon power \u201ccannot touch moneys in the treasury of the United States, except expressly authorized by act of Congress.\u201d<\/p>\n BitMEX was not the only company to catch a break. Separately, Trump on Friday commuted the probation of Ozy Media<\/a>, an online outlet that collapsed under allegations of fraud by its founder Carlos Watson<\/a> two years ago. Ozy was also released from having to pay fines or restitution.<\/p>\n Scholars of presidential pardons said Trump was within his rights.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s absolutely clear to me that a president can pardon corporations. The power to pardon plainly extends to any entity capable of being convicted of a crime,\u201d said Frank Bowman, a University of Missouri law professor.<\/p>\n Yet while they said presidents have relieved companies from fines and other consequences of conviction as long ago as the 19th century, they struggled to think of any prior pardons.<\/p>\n The first known corporate request for a pardon was in 1975, according to a report from the time<\/a>. President Gerald Ford\u2019s White House rejected the request.<\/p>\n Ford\u2019s predecessor, Richard Nixon, commuted the sentence of another company, according to Sam Morison, a former staff lawyer in the Justice Department Office of Pardon Attorney who conducted a review of its archives.<\/p>\n To Stanford University law school professor Bernadette Meyler, Trump\u2019s pardon last week evoked the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling<\/a> in Citizens United<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile we have seen the rise of a trend of treating corporations as persons in other areas of law, we haven\u2019t seen that so far in the area of pardoning,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n While Trump appears to have been within his rights, several observers said they were worried about the pardon\u2019s implications.<\/p>\n Claypool, of Public Citizen, pointed to the crypto industry\u2019s cozy relationship with the Trump administration. The Trump administration has already halted or dropped 14 cases targeting crypto companies<\/a>, Claypool said. The pardon last week sent another message to the corporate world, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you\u2019re a corporation in a favored industry, you can break the law. You can get caught. You can be prosecuted and sentenced with a $100 million fine, and it doesn\u2019t matter,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Brandon Garrett, a Duke University law professor who has written a book about how companies win backroom deals with prosecutors, said the pardon was part of a larger retreat from the enforcement of corporate crimes under Trump, pointing to his order freezing enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThis may just be of a piece with the large and small ways in which corporate accountability is just not a focus. Quite the opposite,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n\n
BitMEX\u2019s Big Break<\/h2>\n
Trump\u2019s Right<\/h2>\n
Worrying Precedent?<\/h2>\n