Written by Nathaniel Parker.

As President Biden prepared to exit the Oval Office for the last time, he left behind a parting gift that turned heads across the political spectrum: a slew of 11th-hour pardons. Among those receiving his presidential grace were Dr. Anthony Fauci, retired Gen. Mark Milley, and even members of his own family. If that weren’t controversial enough, Biden’s pardons extended to unnamed staff from the January 6 House Select Committee, sparking outrage and applause alike.

The timing couldn’t have been more dramatic. Just hours before Donald Trump was sworn in as the 47th president of the United States, Biden’s White House quietly announced the pardons. By the time Biden left the Capitol Rotunda, it wasn’t just the frigid temperatures that had Washington buzzing. Critics quickly questioned whether these preemptive pardons were a move to shield key figures from accountability or a calculated political maneuver aimed at solidifying his legacy.

And then there’s the family factor. Biden didn’t stop at Milley and Fauci—he extended pardons to his brother James, his sister Valerie, and even Hunter, who had been convicted in two separate federal cases last year. For a president who had once decried preemptive pardons as a dangerous precedent, this farewell tour of forgiveness hit a note that some called hypocritical while others called bold.

Critics Warn of a Dangerous Precedent

Biden’s eleventh-hour pardons weren’t universally embraced, even within his own party. High-profile Democrats, including Sen. Amy Klobuchar and former President Bill Clinton, had openly expressed concerns about such sweeping acts of clemency in the days leading up to Biden’s exit. For Clinton, pardoning family members and political allies was a move that threatened to undermine trust in the justice system. “I hope he won’t do that,” Clinton remarked on The View.

Sen. Dick Durbin echoed this sentiment during a CNN interview, pointing out the slippery slope of preemptive pardons. “Where does it start, and where does it stop?” Durbin asked, summing up what many see as the central problem with Biden’s decision: the potential for abuse and the erosion of accountability for those in power.

Even Biden himself had spoken out against preemptive pardons before taking office in 2020. Back then, speculation swirled that Donald Trump would use his pardon power to protect his children and allies, like Rudy Giuliani, from future legal battles. Biden expressed concern about how such a move would reflect on America’s reputation as a nation of laws. Fast forward four years, and Biden now finds himself accused of doing precisely what he once condemned.

Fauci, Milley, and the Fallout

The inclusion of Dr. Anthony Fauci and Gen. Mark Milley in Biden’s pardon list was seen as particularly controversial, given their polarizing roles in recent history. Fauci, the face of America’s COVID-19 response, expressed gratitude for his pardon but insisted it wasn’t necessary. “I’ve committed no crime,” Fauci told ABC News. While his supporters saw the pardon as a shield against baseless accusations, critics argued it sent the wrong message. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis didn’t mince words, slamming Biden’s decision as a “swamp protects its own” moment.

Milley, meanwhile, had long been a thorn in Trump’s side. The retired general famously called Trump “the most dangerous person to this country” before the November election, only to walk back his comments later, perhaps sensing the political winds shifting. Milley’s relationship with the Trump administration was already fraught, thanks in part to the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021—a failure Trump never let him forget. For Milley, the pardon seemed less about shielding him from actual charges and more about ensuring his legacy remained untarnished by the incoming administration.

But it wasn’t just Fauci and Milley drawing attention. The blanket pardon for January 6 Select Committee staffers raised eyebrows, especially given Biden’s careful wording in the official statement. While the pardon wasn’t an admission of guilt, critics on the right saw it as an unnecessary and provocative move, further polarizing an already divided nation.

Our Take

Biden’s parting pardons highlight a troubling trend in American politics: the growing use of executive power as a shield for allies and family members. While every president has the right to issue pardons, doing so in a way that smacks of favoritism or self-preservation risks eroding public trust in government.

By pardoning Fauci, Milley, and his own family members, Biden has opened the door for future administrations to do the same, creating a dangerous precedent. The pardon power is supposed to be an act of justice and mercy, not a tool to protect those with political connections. Worse yet, this kind of move only deepens the public’s cynicism about Washington. If the “swamp protects its own,” where does that leave ordinary Americans who just want fairness and accountability?

Biden’s decision may have been legal, but that doesn’t mean it was right. At a time when the country desperately needs leaders who inspire trust, this farewell gesture feels like a step in the wrong direction