Within the walls of bureaucracy, the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney predominantly offers full pardon recommendations for individuals who have already paid their due to society having completed their sentences. It stands as a stark reminder that Hunter Biden, the son of the President, remains unsentenced.
Observing the traditional framework adopted by the Pardon Attorney’s Office, Hunter Biden would likely fail to meet the prescribed eligibility conditions for a pardon recommendation. It’s fair to say that Hunter Biden’s situation does not coincide with the office’s traditional method of recommending pardons—reserved for those who have already digested the bitterness of a punishment in full form.
Hunter Biden’s case presents a conundrum: yet to bear the brunt of a sentence, he obviously hasn’t paid any dues, let alone completed a term. However, the President’s seemingly limitless authority to grant clemency could supersede these concerns, irrespective of the Pardon Attorney’s directive.
If we take a trip down memory lane, Donald J. Trump tossed aside the conventional practice during his first presidential stint. Exercising unchecked power, Trump perpetually granted clemency to people who weren’t put forward or vetted by the pardon attorney. He not only absolved individuals rejected by the Pardon Office previously but was also magnanimous to those yet untouched by the sentencing hammer.
Electing to pardon in the midst of an ongoing case was, before Trump’s reign, an act that was seldom witnessed. Trump not only revolutionised the clemency granting procedures, but also gave us something to ponder about how these proceedings have been or could be manipulated politically.
Biden has been on the receiving end of mounting pressure from prisoner rights defense groups, who are urging the President to exercise his clemency power more liberally as his term comes to a close. Despite the calls, the frequency of Biden’s clemency pales in comparison to his predecessor.
A mammoth total of almost 12,000 pleas for mercy has rained down on the Pardon Attorney’s office during Biden’s reign. Yet, Mr. President’s mercy seems to be held back for reasons best known to him and his administration.
A dismal clemency output has been presented by Biden; to date, he has rolled out only 157 clemency grants. Distinctively, among these 157, a fewer 25 were full pardons that effectively eliminate convictions, whereas a larger share of 132 were commutations which only bring dwindling prison sentences.
The uncertainty persists: it is yet to be confirmed whether this count includes the pardon awarded to his own offspring. Biden, despite all the hullabaloo about a fair and just administration, seems to be playing hide and seek with the facts.
A contrast between Biden’s and Trump’s first administration turns up visible discrepancies. The former, having issued fewer clemency grants than the latter, suggests a more restrained approach towards meting out judicial reprieve.
Trump, in his first administration, exhibited a rather more lenient stance. His tally reached up to 238 instances of clemency, among which 144 were pardons that eradicated convictions, and 94 were commutations that slashed prison sentences.
These distinct approaches to the power of clemency show how Presidents, at their whim and political desire, can sway the scales of justice. For the better or worse, it invariably paints a picture about their ethos and values.
In conclusion, these figures only highlight Biden’s stark departure from a more generous precedent established by Trump. It raises questions about the motivations behind the administration’s use or misuse of this powerful tool.
With this string of observations, one cannot help but question whether the power of clemency, originally conceived as an instrument of mercy and justice, should be wielded whimsically at the behest of the political motivations of a specific administration.