Presidential Overreach: President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son is an overstep of his presidential power

Lying on federal tax forms. Trying to avoid $1.4 million in taxes. Crimes like this typically don’t disappear from a criminal record with the snap of a finger, not to mention potentially 25 years in prison. That is, unless your daddy, the President of the United States, gives you a full pardon.

This is exactly what President Joe Biden did. He pardoned his son Hunter Biden for 11 years worth of federal crimes just days away from when Hunter was supposed to be sentenced. 

The constitutional passage regarding presidential pardons isn’t even 100 words, leaving room for interpretation. It states that “[the president] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” This gives the president the ability to pardon any federal criminal charge in the U.S. — instead of and not just for family members.

While vague, at this point it comes down to common sense and for Biden to merely observe the actions of previous presidents to know that a full pardon for over a decade of charges isn’t what was intended in the Constitution.

Historically, presidents have pardoned family members, so the idea of a pardon isn’t anything new. However, pardons for crimes as egregious as Hunter’s and over such a long period of time is unheard of. The only presidential pardon that comes close to this is when Gerald Ford gave Richard Nixon a blanket pardon 50 years ago, according to former U.S. pardon attorney Margaret Love in an interview with Politico.

While constitutionally, pardons are virtually unlimited — this is a gross overreach of power.

This also sets a bad precedent for the child of any authority figure, political or not, furthering the standard that the rich and powerful can get away with anything.

The nepotism never seems to end. Soon, every fourth cousin of Biden will be pardoned for a speeding ticket.

If an East student gets a parking pass, nothing stops them from using the “my mom works in the office” excuse when Hunter was pardoned for countless crimes because “his dad’s the president.”

A further concern is the fact that barely a month ago the White House Press Secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, released a statement saying that Biden wouldn’t pardon his son. To turn around three weeks later and reverse that decision with an 11 year pardon calls into question the trustworthiness of our president in his last month of presidency.

In his statement, Biden stated, “For my entire career I have followed a simple principle: just tell the American people the truth.”

But it’s overly clear that it wasn’t the truth when he said that he would abide by the decision of the jury and not pardon Hunter.

Ridiculously, only Hunter’s drug and gun charges are mentioned in his official statement from the White House. The other who-knows-how-many crimes aren’t listed, rather just labeled as “offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed.”

May have committed? This is like a 5-year-old saying “I may or may not have taken a pack of gum from the store.” It’s obvious that the kid is lying and it’s obvious that there are other concerning crimes committed by Hunter in this 11 year period.

The difference between Hunter and the 5-year-old, however, is that mommy probably would make her kid return the gum and apologize. Hunter on the other hand gets a squeaky clean record. This leads to the question of what these eliminated crimes were, and the possibility that Biden is attempting to cover something up in this pardon.

Pardons from former President Donald Trump, in his previous term, no matter how broad, specified the crime that was being pardoned, according to Love.

In his statement, Biden’s main concerns seem to be these two most recent crimes. If that’s the case then previously committed crimes should not be pardoned, only those that are a concern and exactly what’s being pardoned should be open to the public.

A precedent has been set for over two centuries by presidents that pardons must be necessary and reasonable. Not blanket pardons reserved for family members of the president. Future presidents need to take into account the fact that the ability to pardon was given as a privilege and needs to be used as such.