Lawmaker presses Governor Waltz on pardons for convicted fraudsters, cites presidential pardons that relieved restitution

A lawmaker pressed Governor Waltz during a committee hearing about whether Minnesota’s pardon panel has ever granted pardons to people convicted of fraud, and contrasted state practice with recent presidential pardons that the lawmaker said erased hundreds of millions in restitution owed to victims.

The lawmaker began by asking whether fraud is “a victimless crime.” Governor Waltz replied, “I would agree with that. It is not a victimless crime,” and confirmed that the state panel that considers pardons includes the governor, Mr. Ellison and the chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court.

The lawmaker asked whether, in his time on that panel, the governor could recall ever pardoning an individual convicted of fraud. "I can't recall. I can't state either way," the governor said. Asked for his recollection, Mr. Ellison said, "It's possible. I don't recall it though."

The lawmaker moved to federal pardons, noting that at the federal level a presidential pardon can "wipe out" an obligation to pay restitution to victims. He named two convicted defendants — Jason Galanis and Jeremy Hutchinson — and said the defendants had been prosecuted in federal cases for large-scale fraud and corruption. A witness told the committee they were not familiar with where those defendants were being held.

The lawmaker accused President Trump of issuing pardons that relieved convicted fraudsters of restitution obligations, saying, "He pardoned him and relieved him of the requirement to pay restitution to his victims," and later stated that pardons by President Trump have relieved about $1.3 billion in restitution. The committee record shows these allegations were made by the lawmaker; the hearing transcript does not include documentary proof of the $1.3 billion figure or of the effect of each named pardon on restitution obligations.

Governor Waltz responded that pardoning people who have not served their sentences or paid restitution would send a signal the crimes are not being taken seriously. "I believe it would send a signal that we don't take it seriously because you have to put these people in jail and they have to serve their lengthy sentences and they have to do restitution," he said. A participant described Minnesota's customary review, saying that generally pardons follow completion of sentences and repayment, and quoted Governor Waltz's standard: "Have you paid every penny you owe people?"

The hearing focused on accountability for fraud and the impact of pardons on victims and taxpayers; the transcript records discussion and assertions but no formal action or vote on changing the state's pardon process.

The committee did not record any decision on pardons during the segments provided; discussion and questions continued after the exchange recorded here.