No Ones Is Above the Law? Biden’s Pardons Say Otherwise

Joe Biden’s decision to pardon Dr. Anthony Fauci, Liz Cheney, General Mark Milley, members of the January 6 Committee, select Capitol Hill police officers, and his family is a direct assault on the principles of justice and accountability. These pardons were given to people who haven’t been investigated or charged with crimes. If there’s nothing to hide, why issue a pardon? It sends the wrong message to the public and undermines trust in the justice system.

Pardons are meant to show mercy or correct injustices when the courts have failed. In this case, however, Biden preemptively pardoned individuals who never even faced investigation. If there’s truly no evidence of wrongdoing, the justice system should prove it. Issuing pardons beforehand is a way to avoid scrutiny and accountability, and that’s not how things should work in a democracy.

The Legal Implications of Pardons

Accepting a pardon is legally considered an admission of guilt. The U.S. Supreme Court established this precedent in Burdick v. United States (1915), which held that a pardon “carries an imputation of guilt” and its acceptance is a confession of wrongdoing. This makes Biden’s pardons not only questionable but politically charged, as they shield individuals while implying guilt that will now never be addressed.

Why Does Dr. Fauci Need a Pardon?

Dr. Fauci is the public face of the COVID-19 response. In recent committee oversight hearings, Fauci admitted to decisions that were not based on medical data. When asked about the six-foot social distancing rule and how did he come up with this science, Fauci answered “I don’t know. It sorts of just appeared.” Similarly, he admitted that mask mandates were implemented without solid evidence at the time.

These decisions weren’t minor—they shaped the nation’s response to the pandemic and affected millions of lives. Families were separated, children were masked for years, and people with respiratory issues suffered under mandates. If Fauci was confident in his actions, why would he need a pardon? Biden’s decision to shield him suggests there’s more to the story that they don’t want the public to know.

Liz Cheney: Pardoning a War Hawk

Liz Cheney’s inclusion on this pardon list is very questionable. Her career is tied to some of the most devastating foreign policy decisions in history. As the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, one of the architects of the Iraq war, Liz Cheney has been a vocal supporter of U.S. military interventions in the Middle East. She has consistently defended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even as evidence gathered that these conflicts were based on false information and caused loss of innocent lives.

These wars destabilized entire regions, cost trillions of dollars, and resulted in the deaths of thousands of American troops and innocent civilians. Cheney’s role in supporting these policies cannot be ignored. By pardoning her, Biden appears to excuse her role in perpetuating wars and the suffering they caused. 

Liz Cheney has led efforts to hold others accountable during the January 6 hearings, yet she herself has never faced accountability for her role in supporting wars based on false facts and lies. A pardon for Cheney sends the message that accountability only applies to others–not to those who wield political power. 

The January 6 Pardons, But Why Only Some?

Then there are the pardons of Capitol Hill police officers and members of the January 6 Committee. Out of dozens of people involved, only a small group received pardons. Why? If the goal is to protect them from political retaliation, why not pardon everyone in similar positions? This selective approach makes it look like the pardons weren’t about fairness–they were about protecting certain allies while leaving others out.

Hunter Biden’s 11-Year Blanket Pardon

Let’s not forget the 11-year blanket pardon given to Hunter Biden. Biden spent months publicly saying he wouldn’t pardon his son because “no one is above the law.” Yet, Hunter is pardoned. This pardon covers allegations of money laundering, tax evasion, and shady financial dealings with countries like China and Mexico.

The pardon conveniently covers the same years when Hunter’s business dealings were under fire, shielding him from any investigation. It doesn’t just protect Hunter–it protects Joe Biden from potential fallout. If there was no wrongdoing, as Biden claims, why not let the justice system prove it?

The Hypocrisy

What makes this even worse is the hypocrisy. President Trump was attacked for things like how he categorized payments in his business dealings, but Biden is shielding people from far more serious accusations. And it’s not just Hunter Biden–Biden pardoned Fauci and select January 6 individuals, but he didn’t include others who’ve clashed with Trump, like FBI Director Christopher Wray or Special Counsel Jack Smith. Why were they left out? This inconsistency suggests that the idea of “shielding individuals” is more of a manufactured narrative by Democrats than a reality. 

A Dangerous Precedent

Biden’s blanket pardons set a dangerous precedent. They suggest future presidents can use pardons as a political tool to shield allies or family members, even when no charges have been filed. Pardons are supposed to uphold justice—not bypass it.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s precedent in Burdick v. United States (1915) makes these pardons even more troubling. By accepting clemency, these individuals are essentially admitting guilt. Biden’s actions undermine the principle that no one is above the law and weaken public trust in the justice system.

Conclusion

Joe Biden’s pardons are more than just a misuse of power—they’re a betrayal of justice and accountability. By shielding allies like Fauci and Cheney and protecting his son, Biden is sending a message that political connections outweigh fairness.

I am confident that with President Trump back in office, he will address these issues and restore accountability to our government. It’s time to demand better—because our democracy depends on it.