Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Ghislaine Maxwell should not receive a pardon, commutation, or other form of clemency from the President of the United States.
- Bill Number
- H.Res. 635
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-08-05: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-05-01T08:09:14Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This House Resolution (H. Res. 635) expresses the collective opinion of the U.S. House of Representatives opposing any pardon, commutation (reduction of sentence), or other form of clemency for Ghislaine Maxwell from the President. It aims to condemn her crimes, support victims, and highlight the importance of justice in cases of child sexual abuse and trafficking.
Key Provisions
- Condemnation of crimes: The resolution strongly denounces child sexual abuse, sex trafficking, and the individuals who enable or participate in these acts.
- Support for victims: It expresses solidarity with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's crimes, recognizing their ongoing challenges with healing and the need for closure.
- Affirmation of conviction: It states that Maxwell's 2021 conviction and 2022 sentence of 20 years in prison (plus 5 years of supervised release) were fully justified by the evidence, which showed her role in grooming and abusing minors alongside Epstein.
- Opposition to clemency: It formally opposes any presidential pardon or similar relief for Maxwell, arguing that it would undermine justice for victims, especially since Epstein is deceased and Maxwell's imprisonment is the primary accountability remaining.
The resolution includes "Whereas" clauses providing background, such as Maxwell's conviction details, the scale of the abuse (affecting hundreds of children), the lifelong harm to survivors, and speculation about a potential pardon.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This is a non-binding resolution that does not amend or create any new laws. It has no legal force and does not alter statutes, sentencing guidelines, or pardon procedures. It simply conveys the House's viewpoint.
Potential Impacts
- On government agencies: Minimal direct impact, but it could influence the Department of Justice or Federal Bureau of Prisons in emphasizing victim-centered policies. It may also prompt oversight or discussions in the House Judiciary Committee, where it was referred.
- On citizens: Primarily symbolic for the public and survivors, reinforcing that such crimes warrant full accountability and potentially aiding victims' emotional closure. It addresses public concerns about high-profile pardons but does not guarantee any outcome.
- On international relations: No direct effects, as the resolution focuses on a U.S. domestic case involving American courts and federal law.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Victims and survivors: Hundreds of individuals abused by Epstein and Maxwell, who benefit from the resolution's affirmation of their pursuit of justice.
- Ghislaine Maxwell: Directly targeted, as the resolution opposes leniency that could affect her imprisonment.
- U.S. President: Indirectly influenced, as it challenges the use of pardon powers in this context amid public speculation.
- Members of Congress: Sponsors (e.g., Rep. Krishnamoorthi and co-sponsors) and the House as a whole, positioning them on issues of accountability for sexual crimes.
- Broader public and advocacy groups: Those concerned with child protection, anti-trafficking efforts, and transparency in executive clemency.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces the finality of federal convictions for sex trafficking (under laws like 18 U.S.C. § 1591 for sex trafficking of minors) but does not challenge them. It underscores that pardons are a presidential prerogative without congressional override.
- Constitutional: References Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants the President broad power to issue pardons for federal offenses (intended to correct injustices). The resolution politically critiques potential misuse of this power without limiting it.
- Political: As a partisan-leaning statement (introduced by Democrats), it highlights divisions on executive accountability, especially in high-profile cases tied to figures like Epstein. It could shape public discourse on pardons, victim rights, and influence future congressional actions on clemency reforms, though its non-binding nature limits enforceability.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8]
Cosponsors (14)
Rep. Cleaver, Emanuel [D-MO-5], Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Swalwell, Eric [D-CA-14], Rep. Stevens, Haley M. [D-MI-11], Rep. Kaptur, Marcy [D-OH-9], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7], Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1]
Recent Actions
- 2025-08-05: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-08-05: Submitted in House
- 2025-08-05: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Ghislaine Maxwell should not receive a pardon, commutation, or other form of clemency from the President of the United States. — issued 2025-08-05 — PDF (3 pages)