The panic about Trump’s pardons is already counterproductive, producing too many unforced errors by journalists and legal commentators. It has become almost an article of faith among Trump’s critics—especially among the many former prosecutors on TV—that accepting one of his pardons amounts to an admission of guilt. This is wrong as a matter of law, and also of principle. Over the past few decades, many innocent people exonerated by DNA evidence have also accepted pardons, and the Department of Justice has long recognized pardon applications for the innocent. The eagerness to interpret accepting a pardon as evidence of guilt runs roughshod over the presumption of innocence and liberals’ traditional concerns about the criminal justice system. It is hypocritical for critics to be promoting criminal justice reform on the one hand, while also echoing the Trumpists’ “lock ’em up” chants, or guilty-until-proven-innocent philosophy, when it comes to their political opponents.