During his final days in office, Vice President Joe Biden granted a series of high-profile pardons, which sparked a heated debate and raised concerns about the potential repercussions for the individuals who were granted the pardons.
Dr. Anthony Fauci and Liz Cheney, a former Republican congresswoman, were two of the individuals who were granted pardons. Both of these individuals are at the center of contemporary debates and storylines that seek to divide people. Experts in the field of law are warning that the strategy could have consequences that were not anticipated.
in spite of the fact that the White House has described the pardons as a preventative measure to shield these individuals from any punishment that may be imposed by a Congress that is dominated by Republicans and by former President Donald Trump.
In the midst of a period of strong political conflict, Congress, which is now controlled by the Republican Party, has promised to conduct stringent monitoring and investigations of actions that occurred during and after the administration of Vice President Joe Biden.
Cheney, a well-known opponent of Trump who is also the co-chair of the House Select Committee investigating the incident that occurred in the Capitol on January 6, 2021, has been the target of various forms of anger. Conservatives have regularly assailed Dr. Fauci, an immunologist who has worked for a long time and who served as the Chief Medical Advisor to the President in the past, for his influence on the policy about COVID-19.
Those who work in the White House have stated that the decision to grant a pardon was mostly influenced by concerns of the possibility of politically motivated charges under the incoming administration. As per the reports, Vice President Biden viewed the pardons as a manner of protecting individuals such as Cheney, Fauci, and others who have played a substantial part in advancing investigations and policies that are crucial to the legacy of his administration.
It was said by a top source within the White House that “President Biden believes in protecting public servants who have dedicated their lives to upholding democracy and safeguarding public health.” “The purpose of these pardons is not to absolve these individuals of their guilt; rather, they are intended to ensure fairness and protect these individuals from partisan vendettas.”
People who have been found guilty of crimes are normally the recipients of pardons; but, it is also possible for pardons to be granted in advance, as was the case in this particular instance, in order to eliminate the possibility of legal jeopardy.
On the other hand, sentiments on the relocation have not always been favorable. In spite of the fact that pardons can shield individuals from prosecution for some offenses, numerous legal authorities argue that they do not absolve receivers of the obligation to testify under oath in the event that they are compelled to do so. Jesse Binnall, a federal litigation attorney, made it clear that pardons do not offer protection from allegations of perjury or obstruction of justice in the event that the receiver misrepresents themselves throughout the testimony process.
This is what Binnall has to say about the situation: “These pardons might actually create new vulnerabilities for Cheney and Fauci.” They may be protected from punishment for acts that correspond to the specific offenses that are covered by the pardons; nonetheless, they are still subject to the political and legal implications of their subsequent behavior, particularly in the event that any congressional investigations are conducted.
Furthermore, Binnall pointed out that when those who have not been charged of a crime are granted a pardon, it has the potential to undermine the public’s faith in the justice system’s perceived fairness. “Preemptive pardons have the potential to give the impression of wrongdoing when in reality there has been no wrongdoing established,” he remarked.
Concerns have been voiced by critics of both the conservative and liberal ideologies regarding the potential outcomes that could result from Biden’s decision. On the other hand, some Republicans view the pardons as a last-ditch effort to protect supporters from criticism, while progressive Democrats argue that the pardons could undermine public confidence in the administration’s commitment to transparency.
Kevin McCarthy, the Republican Speaker of the House, referred to the pardons as a “political stunt” that was designed to “protect Biden’s cronies.” McCarthy also stated that the oversight actions of the Republican-controlled Congress would continue, including the subpoenaing of notable individuals such as Fauci and Cheney. His statement was made. McCarthy was of the opinion that “no pardon can absolve anyone of responsibility to the American people that they have committed.”
A number of Democrats, in the meantime, have expressed their concern that subsequent administrations would take advantage of the precedent that was established by preemptive pardons. Senator Elizabeth Warren made the following statement: “Despite the fact that I understand the president’s intentions, this approach runs the risk of undermining the principle of equal justice under the law.”
Despite the fact that officials from the White House have not disclosed all of the specific actions that are covered by the pardons, they have made references to actions that were carried out during Cheney’s tenure on the January 6 Committee and Fauci’s responsibility for managing the COVID-19 pandemic. The absence of transparency has been cited by a number of legal scholars as a source of criticism and speculation, and they have advocated for a comprehensive explanation of the scope and purpose of the pardons.
According to Kimberly Wehle, a professor of constitutional law, “it is difficult to assess their legal and ethical implications without clarity on what these pardons entail.” [Citation needed] “The administration ought to be transparent about the rationale behind these decisions in order to prevent the issue from becoming even more politicized,” the author writes.
It is possible that congressional investigators will continue to keep a tight eye on Cheney and Fauci even after the pardons have been granted. In spite of the fact that pardons protect a person from being prosecuted for some offenses, legal experts point out that they do not provide complete immunity from all duties.
Wehle made the following statement: “Cheney and Fauci are still legally required to answer questions honestly if they are called to testify before Congress as a result of the investigation.” The act of being granted a pardon does not grant them the authority to avoid examination or to deceive legislators.
In light of the fact that Republicans have indicated their intention to investigate a range of topics, including the reasons of COVID-19, the pandemic reaction of the Biden administration, and the investigation that took place on January 6, the possibility of subpoenas continues to be significant. Despite the fact that both Cheney and Fauci have shown their willingness to assist with legitimate inquiries, they have also expressed their concerns regarding the prospect of harassment that is motivated by political considerations.
Furthermore, the decision that Vice President Biden made to give these pardons is illustrative of the complicated political landscape that he is currently maneuvering. Despite the fact that they would offer some degree of protection to Cheney, Fauci, and other individuals, the pardons pose significant risks not only for the individuals who are implicated but also for the administration’s reputation within the larger community.
According to Wehle, “The president has made a choice that is not only courageous but also controversial.” It will take some time to discern if these pardons are successful in achieving their objectives or whether they are counterproductive in that they attract even more attention and criticism.
As the legal and political fights continue, one thing is becoming very clear: the controversy that surrounds these pardons will continue to dominate the coming weeks and months, so affecting the narratives of Biden’s legacy and the agenda of the newly Republican-led Congress.
