President Joe Biden, in a truly shocking move, granted a pardon to his son, Hunter. This decision was met with widespread condemnation, not solely from the right-wing media, but also from liberal and moderate voices. The action has been seen as a glaring example of double standards, serving as a testament to the supposed ‘Biden crime family’ theory, a narrative held previously only by conservative commentators but now gaining more traction.
The Biden presidency seems to be going down a slippery slope that chips away at the rule of law which is the cornerstone of our Democracy. It goes without saying that the issuance of a presidential pardon to a family member can set a dark precedent. The fact that left-leaning commentators also voiced their objections indicates a universal discomfort over this move that is nothing short of nepotism in action.
Amidst the backlash, some have turned blind eyes towards the implications of Biden’s actions, suggesting that those who criticize his decision are misguided. But the stakes have risen considerably. According to reports from Politico and The New York Times, a series of pre-emptive pardons for individuals on Donald Trump’s alleged ‘enemies list’ is being considered by the Biden White House.
Such a course of action, if true, would undoubtedly lead to baseless harassment and prosecution of individuals simply for being perceived opponents of the former president. It’s worth noting that Trump’s administration was accused of trying to exploit the judicial system, particularly the FBI and the Department of Justice. However, these allegations never amounted to anything concrete, and it would be a miscarriage of justice to issue pardons based on such ill-founded claims.
Traditionally, American democracy is built on the principle of fairness and justice. The politicization of justice departments or FBI to settle political scores is a characteristic of authoritarian regimes or so-called banana republics, and not of a functioning democracy like the United States. But pronouncements of Biden promising to do just this sparks concerns, raising the question of whether we are indeed heading into uncharted waters.
When innocent people are falsely accused or vindictively targeted, they become fearful. Fear goes beyond the walls of a courtroom. The reputational damage, the financial burdens of legal defenses running into hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention the emotional toll, can be devastating. If this becomes a reality for people on Trump’s alleged ‘enemies list,’ it represents a grim picture of justice, as it stands in the Biden era.
Consider the example of Dr. Steven Hatfill who was unfoundly accused in 2001 of sending anthrax-laced letters. Despite ultimately being proved innocent, his life was thrown into disarray. Probes were launched, his home and office were raided, and he was under constant physical surveillance. He was forced from his job and went into hiding. However, he was never indicted proving the harassment to be entirely baseless.
Could people on Trump’s ‘enemies list’ be subjected to such unfortunate circumstances? The frequency of those threats from Trump during his campaigns could cause one to think it’s possible. Surprisingly, the Biden administration appears to be bolstering these fears rather than dispelling them.
Trump, during his presidency, and as a private citizen, was known to file lawsuits, many seen as attempts to intimidate his adversaries. That seems to be continuing with his rumored ‘enemies list.’ However, such threats shouldn’t be addressed by naïve pre-emptive pardons, but by ensuring that justice is served fairly and equitably, irrespective of political associations.
The name of Sarah Isgur, a former Department of Justice official, has come up. Isgur opposes the idea of a pardon, having faith in the legal system and public opinion to vindicate her. Are we in the middle of a potential large-scale failure of justice, or is it just political theater aiming at demonizing Donald Trump and his administration?
The idea of pre-emptive pardons might seem like a necessary action against what are being framed as unprecedented threats, but this approach may carry inherent capacity to undermine the institution of justice itself. Some argue against broad, pre-emptive pardons stating their potential unconstitutionality, while others believe that they are justified by the unique threats we face today.
Biden’s intervention to ‘protect the innocent’ is dubious when it risks turning the concept of justice into a charade, rather than upholding it. Predictions of a ‘wave’ of pre-emptive pardons are being floated around, with critics suggesting that such steps are unprecedented. They certainly are unprecedented, because they respond to a perceived threat that may not even exist.
Alarmists argue that these pardons might further validate conspiracy theories about the ‘deep state’ and warn of potential abuse of pardon power by future presidents. However, their arguments seem to assume that Trump’s actions were characterized by such considerations, rather than his apparent disregard for them.
Naysayers opine that Biden’s legacy might be tarnished by resorting to such measures. Pardoning offenses, real or imagined, rather than confronting them squarely and transparently through the judicial system, sends a disturbing message. It is worth remembering that actions, especially controversial ones, are remembered longer than vague intentions or promises.
Lastly, there are concerns that these pardons might be interpreted as admissions of guilt. While politicians and media might spin them into this narrative, it is a perilous gamble for Democrats to fully rely on it. It is absolutely vital to remember that fear of opposition shouldn’t determine the path taken, especially when there are crucial principles at stake.
In conclusion, the objections to Biden’s proposed use of pardon power seem warranted. Protecting the rule of law is foundational in our society, and its preservation should take precedence over short-sighted personal gains. It remains urgent that the integrity of the United States’ justice system is maintained, and appropriate actions are taken to ensure it. As important as protecting innocent people is, it shouldn’t be at the cost of jeopardizing due process or the rule of law. The clock is ticking, and the world is waiting to see the next move.