Clemency Without Freedom: New York’s Growing Divide Between Pardons and Commutations
New York Is Granting Clemency—But Who Is Actually Being Brought Home?
Executive clemency is among the most consequential powers entrusted to the Governor of New York. It exists precisely because justice cannot always be measured by the mechanical completion of a sentence imposed years—or decades—earlier.
Yet an examination of Governor Kathy Hochul’s own clemency records reveals a striking disparity between pardons and sentence commutations.
On May 8, 2026, Governor Hochul announced that she had granted clemency to 19 individuals.
All 19 received pardons.
Not one received a commutation.
The Governor’s Office further reported that, since taking office, Hochul had issued 139 total grants of clemency: 119 pardons and only 20 commutations.
That means approximately** 86 percent of her clemency grants have been pardons, compared with approximately 14 percent that have been commutations.**
Those numbers matter because the word clemency can make very different forms of executive action appear interchangeable.
They are not.
A pardon granted to someone who has already completed a sentence can provide enormously important relief from the lasting consequences of a conviction.
A commutation, however, can alter a sentence that is still being served.
For an incarcerated person serving decades—or life—a commutation can mean the difference between continuing to grow old behind prison walls and receiving an earlier opportunity to return home.
That distinction must be at the center of New York’s conversation about clemency.
The 19 People Granted Clemency in May Were Already Free
Governor Hochul’s May 8, 2026 announcement makes this disparity particularly significant.
Her administration granted pardons to 19 people. The Governor’s Office explained that these individuals had completed their sentences and had lived crime-free lives for significant periods—“in most cases for over 20 years.”
Those pardons matter.
A conviction can follow someone for decades, interfering with employment, housing, professional opportunities, immigration status and other aspects of life long after a sentence has ended.
People who have demonstrated rehabilitation deserve relief from unnecessary collateral consequences.
But these 19 pardons did something fundamentally different from commuting the sentence of someone presently incarcerated.
These grants did not shorten 20-, 30-, 40-year or life sentences.
They did not bring incarcerated parents back to their children.
They did not allow aging incarcerated people to return to their families.
They did not determine that decades of demonstrated rehabilitation justified reconsideration of continued confinement.
The people receiving those 19 pardons had already completed their sentences.
And that leaves New York with an uncomfortable but necessary question:
What about the people who are still inside?
Pardons and Commutations Are Not the Same
When government officials announce that dozens—or more than a hundred—people have received “clemency,” the public deserves to understand what that number actually represents.
A pardon generally forgives or provides relief from the continuing legal consequences associated with a conviction. It does not necessarily mean that a person was released from prison.
A commutation reduces or modifies an existing sentence.
For an incarcerated person, that distinction is enormous.
A person may have transformed their life over 20 or 30 years of incarceration, earned degrees, mentored others, developed programs, maintained an exemplary institutional record, accepted responsibility, matured far beyond the person who originally entered prison and still have decades remaining before meaningful release consideration.
Clemency provides a constitutional mechanism for government to examine that transformation.
That is precisely why commutation matters.
Governor Hochul Has Granted Commutations—But They Remain a Small Minority
It is important to be precise.
It would be factually incorrect to say Governor Hochul has never granted a commutation to an incarcerated person.
She has.
For example, on December 30, 2025, Governor Hochul announced 13 clemency grants consisting of 11 pardons and two commutations.
The two commutations were granted to Terrance Cole and Raphael Jackson, both of whom were incarcerated and serving lengthy sentences.
According to the Governor’s Office, Cole had served more than 11 years of a 20-years-to-life sentence and otherwise would not have appeared before the Board of Parole until 2034.
Jackson had served more than 10 years of a 16-years-to-life sentence and otherwise would not have appeared before the Board until 2031.
Their sentences were commuted to provide earlier opportunities to appear before the Parole Board.
Their cases prove something extraordinarily important:
The Governor possesses the power to reach inside New York’s prisons and reconsider sentences being served today.
The question is therefore not whether Governor Hochul can use executive clemency to help incarcerated people.
She can.
The question is why that power has been exercised through commutations so much less frequently than through pardons.
119 Pardons. 20 Commutations.
The Governor’s own May 2026 numbers deserve to be repeated:
139 total clemency grants.
119 pardons.
20 commutations.
Approximately 86 percent pardons.
Approximately 14 percent commutations.
And in the May 2026 clemency round:
19 pardons.
Zero commutations.
This is not an argument that those pardons should not have been granted.
They should be evaluated on their merits, and people who have demonstrated decades of rehabilitation deserve meaningful relief.
The concern is the profound numerical disparity between pardons and commutations.
A governor can truthfully announce that more than one hundred people have received “clemency,” while the overwhelming majority of those grants did not involve reducing the sentence of a currently incarcerated person.
That distinction deserves far more public attention.
Rehabilitation Cannot Only Matter After Freedom
There is also a deeper philosophical contradiction that New York must confront.
Governor Hochul’s clemency announcements repeatedly emphasize concepts such as remorse, rehabilitation, personal improvement and commitment to community.
Those are worthy considerations.
But if rehabilitation matters, why should its significance become dramatically greater after someone has already completed a sentence?
What about the person demonstrating rehabilitation inside prison?
What about someone who entered prison at 20 and is now 50?
What about the person who earned an associate degree, then a bachelor’s degree?
What about the person who became a mentor?
A legal researcher?
An educator?
A violence-prevention advocate?
A religious leader?
A father or mother who spent decades trying to maintain relationships with children from behind prison walls?
What about the person whose disciplinary record, educational achievements and service to others demonstrate that the individual standing before the state today is profoundly different from the individual sentenced decades earlier?
If rehabilitation is real, then rehabilitation must be capable of carrying consequences before a person is released.
Otherwise, society creates an almost impossible proposition:
Prove that you have changed—but continue serving the sentence imposed upon the person you used to be.
A Sentencing Court Cannot Predict a Human Life
A judge imposing a sentence cannot know exactly who someone will become 20, 30 or 40 years later.
A prosecutor cannot predict decades of human development.
A sentencing statute cannot individually account for every transformation that may occur during decades of incarceration.
No courtroom possesses a crystal ball.
A 25-year-old standing for sentencing is not necessarily psychologically, intellectually, spiritually or morally identical to the 55-year-old who may eventually petition the Governor for mercy.
That does not erase the original crime.
It does not erase victims.
It does not eliminate accountability.
But accountability and permanent human condemnation are not synonymous.
Executive clemency exists partly because justice sometimes requires the government to look again.
Not to forget what happened.
Not to rewrite history.
But to ask a different question:
Who is this person now?
New York’s Incarcerated Population Is Aging While Families Wait
For families of incarcerated people, clemency is not an abstract political concept.
It is measured in birthdays.
Graduations.
Funerals.
Children becoming adults.
Parents becoming elderly.
Grandchildren being born.
Medical diagnoses.
Empty chairs at family gatherings.
And years that cannot be returned.
For someone serving an extraordinarily lengthy sentence, five additional years are not merely numbers on a calendar.
They are five years in which a parent may die.
Five years in which a child grows up.
Five years in which health deteriorates.
Five years in which someone who may eventually be released anyway remains separated from society.
That is why executive commutation carries such extraordinary significance.
This Is Not an Argument Against Pardons
The people receiving pardons should not become collateral casualties of criticism directed at New York’s clemency system.
Pardons matter.
People who completed their sentences decades ago should not necessarily continue suffering lifelong barriers because of convictions for which they have already been punished.
The solution is not fewer deserving pardons.
The solution is a more meaningful use of commutation.
New York is capable of doing both.
Pardon people who have demonstrated rehabilitation after returning home.
And seriously examine whether people who have demonstrated extraordinary rehabilitation during decades of incarceration still need to remain imprisoned.
Those ideas are not contradictory.
They are expressions of the same fundamental proposition:
Human beings possess the capacity to change.
Clemency Must Be Measured by More Than Announcements
Governor Hochul has emphasized reforms to the clemency process, including an advisory panel, additional staffing resources and increased communication with applicants.
Those procedural reforms can be valuable.
But ultimately, a clemency system must also be evaluated by its outcomes.
An advisory panel is not a commutation.
Additional staff is not a commutation.
An application portal is not a commutation.
A letter telling a family that an application remains under review is not a commutation.
Procedure matters.
But for the incarcerated person who believes decades of transformation justify a second look, the ultimate question remains extraordinarily simple:
Will the Governor meaningfully exercise her constitutional power to reconsider my sentence?
New York Deserves Greater Transparency
The Governor’s Office should provide comprehensive and easily accessible public data about the clemency process.
New Yorkers should know:
How many pardon applications are pending?
How many commutation applications are pending?
How many incarcerated applicants have waited longer than one year?
How many have waited two years?
Three years?
How many applicants have served more than 20 years?
How many have served more than 30?
How many applicants are elderly?
How many are seriously ill?
How many have demonstrated substantial educational, vocational or rehabilitative accomplishments?
How many applications are denied each year?
How many receive no final determination?
And what criteria distinguish the extraordinary case that receives a commutation from the rehabilitated person who continues waiting?
Transparency should mean more than acknowledging receipt of an application.
It should allow the public to evaluate whether clemency is functioning as an authentic mechanism of mercy, individualized justice and sentence reconsideration.
The Numbers Tell a Story
Governor Hochul deserves to have her clemency record described accurately.
She has granted commutations.
She has granted relief to incarcerated individuals.
But accuracy requires acknowledging the other side of the record as well.
As of May 8, 2026, the Governor’s Office reported:
139 clemency grants.
Of those:
119 were pardons.
20 were commutations.
And the Governor’s May 2026 clemency round consisted of:
19 pardons.
Zero commutations.
Every person receiving clemency in that particular round had already completed their sentence.
Those facts should become part of New York’s larger discussion about sentencing, rehabilitation and executive mercy.
The Question Governor Hochul Must Confront
There are incarcerated New Yorkers who have spent decades trying to demonstrate that human transformation is possible.
There are families preparing clemency petitions.
There are people collecting educational records, certificates, letters of support, employment plans, housing plans, disciplinary histories and evidence of rehabilitation.
They are doing so because executive clemency represents hope that government can recognize something the original sentencing court could never have known:
Who that person would become.
New York should celebrate redemption after incarceration.
But New York must also have the courage to recognize redemption during incarceration.
A meaningful clemency system cannot merely ask whether a person who has already returned to society deserves relief from an old conviction.
It must also be willing to confront one of the most difficult questions government can ask:
Has this incarcerated person served enough?
For some applicants, the answer will be no.
For others, after careful individualized review, the answer may be yes.
That is precisely why the constitutional power exists.
The greatest test of executive clemency is not simply whether government can forgive someone who has already walked through the prison gates.
It is whether government possesses the courage, in deserving cases, to determine that someone should finally be given the opportunity to walk through them.
SOURCES & REFERENCES
- New York State Office of Governor Kathy Hochul — “Governor Hochul Grants Clemency to Nineteen Individuals,” May 8, 2026.
This is the primary source for the most recent figures discussed in this article. The Governor’s Office states that Hochul granted 19 pardons in this round and reported a cumulative total of 139 clemency grants—119 pardons and 20 commutations—since taking office.
Official source: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-grants-clemency-nineteen-individuals
- New York State Office of Governor Kathy Hochul — “Governor Hochul Grants Clemency to Thirteen Individuals,” December 30, 2025.
The Governor’s Office reported 11 pardons and two commutations in this round. The announcement identifies Terrance Cole and Raphael Jackson as the two individuals whose sentences were commuted and provides information about their sentences and parole eligibility.
Official source: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-grants-clemency-thirteen-individuals-3
- New York State Office of Governor Kathy Hochul — “Governor Hochul Grants Clemency to Thirteen Individuals,” August 15, 2025.
This official announcement documents another clemency round consisting of 13 pardons and reports that Hochul had made 107 clemency grants at that point in her administration.
Official source: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-grants-clemency-thirteen-individuals-2
Source Note: The central argument of this article deliberately distinguishes between pardons and commutations. It would be inaccurate to state that Governor Hochul has never granted relief to incarcerated people. Her administration has granted commutations. The documented criticism is that commutations constitute a substantially smaller portion of her overall clemency record and that her May 8, 2026 round consisted entirely of pardons rather than commutations.
