If Republicans win, Derek Chauvin could be pardoned

The keys to early release for imprisoned Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin could belong to two Republicans after Tuesday’s election. Those candidates are House Speaker Lisa Demuth in the governor’s race and Ron Schutz, who is running for attorney general. If elected, the two would join state Supreme Court Chief Justice Theodora Gaïtas on the three-person state Board of Pardons, replacing two DFLers in current Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison.

The board determines who receives relief and forgiveness for state convictions. To prevail with the board, an applicant must receive two affirmative votes, one of which must come from the governor. Chauvin, 50, is now in a low-security federal facility in Big Spring, Texas, with a release date of November 2037. He has not applied for relief from his state conviction because he would be rejected by the current board, since it includes Walz and Ellison. If the two Republican candidates win, however, I would expect Chauvin to apply quickly.

The former Minneapolis cop’s path to freedom is complex because he would need relief from both his federal and state convictions. He was convicted by a Hennepin County District Court jury in 2021 of the murder of George Floyd. Judge Peter Cahill sentenced him on that charge to 22.5 years. In federal court, Chauvin pleaded guilty in December 2021 to violating Floyd’s civil rights. He was sentenced to more than 20 years on that charge.

To win release, Chauvin would also need a presidential pardon for his federal conviction. Given President Donald Trump’s willingness to pardon convicted fraudsters and rioters while punishing Minnesota generally, is there any doubt that he’d swing the cell door open for Chauvin?

The DFLers would not grant Chauvin relief. Ellison, who oversaw Chauvin’s prosecution in state court and is seeking re-election, firmly opposes a pardon. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, the DFL nominee for governor, also would not pardon Chauvin. “No candidate should have trouble ruling that out,” a spokesman for her campaign said. But a solid faction in the Republican Party believes that Chauvin was wrongfully convicted and that his ongoing incarceration is unjust.

Recall that the state Republican Party held a brief, unplanned moment of silence and prayer for Chauvin at its convention in Duluth last May. On Oct. 26, Demuth was asked multiple times whether she supports Chauvin’s early release. She clearly didn’t want to answer. That’s understandable because the question puts Demuth in a tough spot. If she came out against a pardon for Chauvin, she would risk alienating Republican voters who believe he was railroaded. If she came out in favor of a pardon, she could alienate the more moderate voters she hopes to attract.

So when she was asked at a news conference whether she remained open to pardoning Chauvin, she responded, “I never said that,” and changed the topic. Demuth was asked twice more and declined to answer. That same Monday afternoon on WCCO Radio, host Jason DeRusha pressed her further. “I’m not considering pardoning him right now, Jason; what I’m considering is protecting Minnesotans taxpayer dollars,” she said.

He asked again: Do you have a position on pardoning Chauvin? Demuth said, “You must have missed what I said ... I’m not considering pardoning him right now.” Those are unsatisfying answers to a legitimate question regarding the prime defendant in a historic crime of global notoriety. I know there’s a right-wing contingent that believes Floyd died because of his drug use, not the illegal prone restraint that lasted nearly 10 minutes. But there’s a foundational principle in policing that prosecutors repeated at the trials for the four officers: in your custody is in your care. When the Minneapolis officers handcuffed Floyd and put him face down on the pavement, they had a duty to keep him safe. Two juries — one federal and one state — found that the officers failed in that duty.

Remember, as well, that Chauvin was the veteran officer on the scene. Two officers were rookies, looking to him for direction. One of the rookies twice asked whether they should roll Floyd on his side so he could breathe. As he kneeled on Floyd, Chauvin twice rejected the rookie’s suggestion. If Demuth disagrees with the jury convictions, she should let us know, as that’s important information for voters to have. Her nonanswers suggest that she is open to freeing Chauvin. Schutz didn’t respond to multiple inquiries regarding his plans for Chauvin. But if these two are elected, it would be Demuth’s vote that is pivotal to Chauvin’s release.

A definitive no on a pardon should be the only acceptable answer. Klobuchar and Ellison have said it. In their silence, Schutz and Demuth want us to believe they’re undecided. I would love to hear their explanations why Chauvin merits the mercy he was unwilling to show to Floyd, who pleaded for his life until he no longer had the ability to speak or breathe.