I think part of the problem with pardon power is that it can be freely done. I think a president should nominate someone for pardoning, then congress critters have to give a 51% vote in favor of pardoning for it to take affect. 30 days have to pass during the nomination period for them to review the pardon, the pardon to be public knowledge, and congress critters having their name attached to their vote. Particular crimes should be noted for the pardoning, and a pardon doesn’t void new infractions of the same kind of crime. A second 30 day direct voting period then takes place to confirm the pardon. The general public sends in a vote, based on all voters who send in a ballot. By default in this stage, the pardon passes unless 51% of the ballots reject the pardon. To sum up: 1a: A president nominates a person for pardon for specific crimes at the time of the pardon. 1b: The nominated for pardoning must be considered a flight risk, and prevented from free international travel during the review stages. 2: After 30 days of review, 51% of congress must decide whether approve of the pardon, attaching their name to the vote. 3: Following the congressional voting period, direct voters from the public can send in ballots to cancel the pardon. 51% of voters who submit a ballot must agree to cancel the pardon.