On November 7, 2025, President Donald Trump signed a sweeping proclamation granting full, complete, and unconditional pardons to a long roster of political allies embroiled in efforts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The announcement, delivered by U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin on X (formerly Twitter), immediately sent shockwaves through Washington and reignited fierce debate over the boundaries of presidential power, accountability, and the rule of law.
The list of those pardoned reads like a who’s who of Trump’s inner circle and legal team during the tumultuous post-election months of 2020. Among the most prominent names are former New York City mayor and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, former Trump lawyers Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, ex-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark. The tally doesn’t stop there—dozens of others, including lawyers Ken Chesebro and John Eastman, Arizona GOP figures Kelli Ward and Michael Ward, and Trump campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn, are also covered by the blanket clemency.
According to the proclamation, the pardons apply to conduct relating to “the advice, creation, organization, execution, submission, support, voting, activities, participation in, or advocacy for or of any slate or proposed slate of Presidential electors, whether or not recognized by any State or State official, in connection with the 2020 Presidential Election, as well for any conduct relating to their efforts to expose voting fraud and vulnerabilities in the 2020 Presidential Election.” The document, dated November 7 and bearing Trump’s signature, emphasizes that the clemency is “not limited to” only those specifically named in the order.
“This proclamation ends a grave national injustice perpetrated upon the American people following the 2020 Presidential Election and continues the process of national reconciliation,” the proclamation declares, as reported by TNND and CNN. The White House, through press secretary Karoline Leavitt, doubled down on this framing, stating, “These great Americans were persecuted and put through hell by the Biden Administration for challenging an election, which is the cornerstone of democracy. Getting prosecuted for challenging results is something that happens in communist Venezuela, not the United States of America, and President Trump is putting an end to the Biden Regime’s communist tactics once and for all.”
Yet, the legal reality is more complicated. While the presidential pardon is “full, complete, and unconditional,” it applies only to federal charges. State-level charges—many of which are currently pending against some of the pardoned individuals in places like Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada—remain unaffected. As CNN notes, none of the people on the list are currently charged with federal crimes, though several were named as unindicted co-conspirators in special counsel Jack Smith’s federal election subversion case. That case was withdrawn after Trump’s 2024 election victory, but state prosecutions continue apace.
Jeffrey Clark, who attempted to use the Justice Department’s authority to overturn the election results in 2020 and was himself named as an unindicted co-conspirator, acknowledged the limitations of the clemency. In a post on X, Clark revealed that Trump had personally called him on November 7 to inform him of the pardon. “I wish I could be declaring this legal nonsense over for good—a pardon should totally and abruptly kill off these federal bar and Georgia-federal attacks on me and many others,” Clark wrote. “Sadly, that’s not immediate reality.”
For many of the recipients, the pardons represent both a shield and a symbol. Giuliani, who played a leading role in the so-called “fake electors” scheme to block then-President-elect Joe Biden from taking office, expressed gratitude but insisted he never sought a pardon. “He never sought a pardon but is deeply grateful for President Trump’s decision,” Giuliani spokesperson Ted Goodman told CNN, adding that Giuliani “stands by his work following the 2020 presidential election.”
Sidney Powell, another high-profile Trump lawyer, was at the center of conspiracy theories claiming the 2020 election had been stolen. Jenna Ellis, who faced accusations of spreading false claims about widespread voter fraud and pleaded guilty in a Georgia case, also benefited from the pardon. Ellis’s cooperation with authorities in Arizona led to charges against her being dropped, highlighting the tangled web of legal battles still playing out across multiple states.
Ken Chesebro and John Eastman, both architects of the fake electors plan, were similarly pardoned. Chesebro had previously pleaded guilty in Georgia’s election racketeering case. Kelli Ward and her husband, Michael Ward, accused of acting as fake electors in Arizona, now find themselves shielded from federal prosecution but still facing state-level scrutiny.
Boris Epshteyn, a Trump campaign lawyer who prosecutors alleged helped organize the fake electors scheme and later served as one of Trump’s personal lawyers during his 2024 New York criminal trial, was also included in the clemency. The breadth of the list underscores the extent to which Trump’s allies have faced legal jeopardy for their roles in the post-2020 election efforts.
This wave of pardons is not the first time Trump has wielded the clemency power to protect his supporters. One of his first acts upon returning to office was to pardon over 1,000 individuals charged or convicted in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. More recently, he granted clemency to a retired New York City police officer convicted in 2023 for stalking a New Jersey family on behalf of the Chinese government, as well as to former Major League Baseball star Darryl Strawberry for a 1995 tax evasion charge.
Notably, the proclamation explicitly states that the pardon does not apply to Trump himself, a point emphasized in both the official document and media coverage. Presidential pardons, as legal experts often remind, cannot shield an individual from state or local prosecution, nor can they be used for self-pardon, at least under current interpretations of the law.
As expected, the pardons have reignited partisan debate. Supporters of the former president argue that the prosecutions were politically motivated, with White House officials and many conservative commentators framing the legal actions as an attack on democracy itself. Critics, meanwhile, warn that such sweeping pardons undermine the rule of law, set a dangerous precedent for future presidents, and could embolden further attempts to subvert electoral outcomes.
For now, the fate of many of Trump’s allies remains uncertain, with state-level cases grinding on and legal teams preparing to test the boundaries of how far a presidential pardon can reach. The story is far from over, but Trump’s latest move has once again placed the power—and controversy—of the presidential pardon squarely in the national spotlight.
