At the moment, they can prosecute someone and if they convict, the president can't issue a pardon for the conviction.

But apparently what they don't have is the power to initiate a prosecution of someone who has already been pardoned by the president because of double jeopardy.

as the article mentions.

Double jeopardy applies to within the SAME jurisdiction. If a Cohen action was a felony involving the jurisdictions of 7 states and that of the federal government, he could be tried in all 7 states and by the federal government.

If this was about a Democrat, the right'd love it since amending NY's law would increase NY state rights over the nation's chief executive.

Sheesh!

Right now, in many states, there are no constraints on prosecution of state crimes that are also federal crimes. If a federal crime was committed that overlaps with a state crime, the subject can be prosecuted and punished in both jurisdictions.

But New York has a special law that says a subject cannot be prosecuted for a state crime IF prosecuted for a federal crime. The federal prosecution is defined to begin when a guilty plea is lodged, or when a jury is empaneled for a trial.

So under current law, here is what could happen. Manafort is charged with federal crimes. He goes to trial. Jury selection finishes and the trial begins. At that point, the president pardons him. Then the federal prosecution ends, and also a NY state prosecution is barred. If the pardon came down before the jury was seated, NY prosecution would still be allowed.

Mueller is dealing with this quirk of NY law by only charging Manafort with some of the crimes he could charge. Then if the president issues a federal pardon, NY could prosecute him for other different crimes.

And there are currently 12 exceptions to this NY law about prosecuting state crimes. Schneiderman is dealing with the problem for all involved in Trump Traitor Oligarch Russiagate by asking for one more exception.

Is Schneiderman just acting AG for the recused Berman or whatever his name is?

Some safeguards need to be put in place because it sure seems like ultimately the orange troglodyte has a way of removing people who we're relying on to remove him.

SDNY is federal

Spanky can’t touch him...in fact, did you know? - Trump DESPISES Mr. Schneiderman, and used to go after him a LOT in his tweets, back in the day, constantly referring to Mr. Schneiderman as a “lightweight” -

Well, we’ll see about that...AG Schneiderman is a REAL pit bull, unlike this Cohen punk -

Or would he be in charge of prosecuting/investigating a whole slew of different Trump family crimes?

I really don't want that slippery mobster to get out of any of this.

Then Schneiderman can prosecute at will (within the limits of NY law).

Since a lot of dump's business is in NY that might put a crimp in his style.

I was also wondering about RICO prosecutions. Can these be pardoned? Especially by someone who is engaged in the activities?

Money laundering for one.

He could charge some defendants with more than he as.

and all are in play from what I've read.

And a bill needs to pass both houses before the gov can sign it.

Looks like the good guys lose. This means unless schneiderman cuts a deal with muehler and files charges now, trump can let his whole crime family completely off the hook.

..it's under R control because of a group of Democrats who caucus with and throw control to the Republicans. More New Yorkers elected actual Democrats than they did Republicans, and then the Democrats turned around and gave control to the Republicans.

And Andrew Cuomo has wink-winked allowed this, claiming he has no authority to do anything and then recently in the face of a liberal primary challenger all of a sudden found a way to do so.

even though Dems appeared to win the majority of seats.

Under the "dual sovereignty" doctrine, the double jeopardy clause of the United States Constitution does not prohibit successive federal and state prosecutions for the same conduct (Bartkus v Illinois, 359 US 121 [1959]). But in New York, protection against double jeopardy is statutory as well as constitutional. I think Utah is the same.

I hope I’m wrong, but I’d be stunned if they could retroactively apply changes in the law to past conduct. The idea that these unethical, unpatriotic, thieving criminals could get a walk just bums me the hell out.

Also the New York law allows prosecutions for racketeering and income tax evasion.

and I'm sure NY State banking laws were broken with all the money-laundering, false statements and misrepresentations to acquire loans for Trump's business. Trump and Co. will likely be spending the next couple of decades in State Court in NY and NJ.

I hope Cuomo and the state legislature have the courage to do what Attorney General Schneiderman is suggesting.

with regard to Article 40, he's only looking to add a single exception, an exception that is specific to presidential pardons. I mean if you take it out of context (forget that he's the state AG), I guess one could assume he's trying to do away with all pardons?

NPR's headline stated he was looking to close the "Pardon Loophole." Not much difference IMO. I know there are space constraints that a writer isn't aware of, so while it isn't feasible to do so, I do wish they were allowed to actually write their own headlines. I think that would be a major improvement all around.

From Schneiderman's letter: "The problem arises under Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Law. Under that law, jeopardy attaches when a defendant pleads guilty, or, if the defendant proceeds to a jury trial, the moment the jury is sworn.xi If any of those steps occur in a federal prosecution, then a subsequent prosecution for state crimes “based upon the same act or criminal transaction” cannot proceed, unless an exception applies.xii New York’s law provides exceptions when a court nullifies a prior criminal proceeding (such as when an appeals court vacates a conviction),xiii or even when a federal court overturns a federal conviction because the prosecution failed to establish an element of the crime that is not an element of the New York crime.xiv But there is no parallel exception for when the President effectively nullifies a federal criminal prosecution via pardon."

I'm assuming you're talking about the pardon loophole and not double jeopardy in general, since that's a basic protection that keeps people from being tried more than once for the same crime.

In Schneiderman's letter he states that based on his staff's research, they believe the pardon loophole was unintended. Here's an excerpt:

The President’s power to pardon federal crimes is sweeping and subject to limited review by the other branches of government. Our country’s founders argued this power was “benign” and would be used by presidents with “scrupulousness and caution.” Thus far, they have generally been right. Since the Nation’s founding, presidents have used this power sparingly, largely to do justice, rather than subvert it.

Yet recent reports indicate that the President may be considering issuing pardons that may impede criminal investigations. This is disturbing news, not only because it would undermine public confidence in the rule of law, but also because—due to a little-known feature of New York law that appears to be unique in its reach—a strategically-timed pardon could prevent individuals who may have violated our State’s laws from standing trial in our courts as well. My staff has researched the relevant state statute and its legislative history, and can find no evidence that the Legislature intended this result.

Although more than twenty states grant only the minimum double-jeopardy protection required by the Constitution, New York and several other states have added statutory protections that go beyond those requirements. These laws generally provide limited protections against successive prosecutions under state criminal law only where another jurisdiction (such as another State) already has prosecuted the defendant for identical criminal acts or offenses. As a longtime supporter of criminal justice reform, I am proud that New York has long been among the leaders in protecting criminal defendants from facing successive punishments for the same acts.

Nevertheless, New York’s statutory protections could result in the unintended and unjust consequence of insulating someone pardoned for serious federal crimes from subsequent prosecution for state crimes—even if that person was never tried or convicted in federal court, and never served a single day in federal prison.

The posturing is getting more entertaining by the minute. What a show.

I don't want to see a single one of them avoid prosecution in this way.