Those who don’t learn history are doomed to pardon it.

Presidents and governors have a wide variety of powers, the power to pardon among them. Leaders have used that ability to right wrongs, establish limits on excessive punishments and restoring the reputations of the innocent. This week, President Donald Trump exercised that power and pardoned Susan B. Anthony, one of America’s most recognized civil rights leader.

There was just one problem. No one asked Trump to do so. In fact, the museum that bears Anthony’s name sent a gracefully worded rebuke in response to the president’s action, which was basically thanks, but no thanks.

Anyone who knows Anthony’s life and history is aware of why the pardon—a welcome gesture to most convicted of a crime—is being seen more as a publicity stunt than as a way to balance the scales of justice. She stood as a beacon for the women’s right to vote, even though she didn’t live to see it come to pass, and her crime was that she dared to cast a ballot, something that only men were allowed to do in the 1800s.

In 1872, when she took that action in defiance of society and the patriarchy, Anthony was testing the waters following the passage of the 14^th Amendment, which gave Black people equal rights following the Civil War. This included the right for men to vote. Men, not women.

Anthony cast her vote and went home, and shortly thereafter, the marshal came to arrest her. Between the arrest and the trial in 1873, Anthony spoke in 28 towns and villages in Monroe County, New York, asking the question, “Is it a crime for a U.S. citizen to vote?” It was the only chance she had to speak on the matter, as she was not even allowed to speak in her own defense during the trial, something we would scarcely believe was possible in our society today.

The judge in the case dismissed the jury at the trial and gave his own judgment of guilty. He fined Anthony $100, a fine she adamantly refused to pay. According to the folks that run the museum that bears her name, to pay the fine would have legitimized the proceedings. They said that Trump’s pardon did exactly the same thing.

They’re right. There was no request by anyone to pardon the suffragist, no one crying out that her story in the history books is less than stellar. There was no reason for Trump to take action on Anthony’s behalf. This is all about Trump and the attention he seeks.

Trump issued the pardon as a way to recognize the centennial of women getting the right to vote through the 19^th Amendment. However, there are other ways to pay tribute to Anthony that do not come across as a slap in the face to all of her hard work. If the president had truly wanted to honor Anthony and the women’s right to vote, he would have done something that didn’t legitimize, in Anthony’s own words, “the greatest outrage history ever witnessed.”

It’s also pretty ironic that Trump is trying to draw attention to one of this country’s greatest advocates for voting at the same time that he’s trying to cast aspersions on the notion of mail-in voting. With some folks afraid of becoming prey to the coronavirus, casting a ballot by mail seems like the healthier alternative, but the president claims allowing this will bring about the end of democracy as we know it in an effort to curb voter participation in the 2020 election.

What better way to hide an attempt at voter disenfranchisement than by looking like you’re hand in hand with someone who believes everyone should vote? Still, the pardon was the wrong way to go. Pardon me for saying so, but Trump should give Susan B. Anthony her due instead of using her as a political prop, and the next time he delves into the past, he should adhere to the truth and not turn it into revisionist history.