It is disturbing, however, that Janklow pardoned his son-in-law, a case in which he had an obvious conflict of interest, and that he sealed the records of his pardons, shielding them from public scrutiny. Janklow says that he didn't know the pardons weren't to be sealed unless they were recommended by a review board. Janklow contends that he never read the statutes governing pardons. You'd think a Governor might want to understand the limits and scope of his power before he begins to exercise it.

It isn't unusual for Presidents and Governors to pardon friends if they believe their friends have been treated unjustly. That's their prerogative. Nor is it unusual that their decisions to pardon friends are criticized. That's the public's prerogative. But mercy shouldn't be limited to friends. Pardon applications should usually be screened by a board that applies objective standards to recommend pardons for those applicants who truly deserve them, whether or not they're buddies with the Governor. Janklow granted a number of other pardons that went through that process, and there's no reason to believe that those pardon recipients were undeserving of his mercy.