US President Joe Biden issued a full presidential pardon to his son, Robert Hunter Biden on December 1, absolving him of all charges stemming from tax evasion and a gun-related indictment. The decision, unprecedented and deeply polarizing, has ignited a firestorm of criticism, with detractors accusing the President of undermining his previous commitments to impartiality and judicial independence.
A Reversal of Promises
Throughout his presidency, Joe Biden had consistently stated that he would not intervene in his son’s legal battles. However, the pardon signifies a stark departure from this stance. In a statement, the President justified his decision, alleging that Hunter Biden was subjected to “selective, unfair prosecution” and that the legal proceedings against him were politically motivated.
“The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election,” President Biden stated. “No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong.”
Hunter Biden’s Legal Troubles
Hunter’s legal woes date back to allegations of tax evasion from 2016 to 2019, during which he failed to pay approximately $1.4 million in federal taxes, despite having access to sufficient funds. Additionally, he faced charges for providing false information on a federal form while purchasing a firearm. After pleading guilty in September 2024 to all counts in a nine-charge indictment, Hunter was set for sentencing later this month, with a potential maximum penalty of 17 years in prison.
Despite his guilty plea, President Biden argued that Hunter’s actions were neither unprecedented nor typically subject to criminal prosecution. “Without aggravating factors like use in a crime or multiple purchases, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form,” he asserted.
A Decision riddled with Controversy
Presidential pardons, while constitutionally sanctioned, have historically drawn public ire when perceived as acts of favoritism or political expediency. Gerald Ford’s 1974 pardon of Richard Nixon following the Watergate scandal remains one of the most controversial, with 59% of Americans opposing it at the time. Similarly, George H.W. Bush faced criticism for pardoning figures implicated in the Iran-Contra affair, and Bill Clinton was lambasted for pardoning his half-brother, Roger Clinton, over drug charges. Donald Trump also faced backlash for pardoning close associates, including his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s father, Charles Kushner, and advisors Stephen Bannon and Roger Stone.
Critics argue that Biden’s pardon undermines public trust in the justice system and sets a troubling precedent of familial favoritism. Some members of Congress, including Biden’s political opponents, have called for investigations into the decision, framing it as an abuse of executive power.
Supporters of the President, however, contend that the pardon was a necessary act of fairness in the face of alleged political persecution. They point to Hunter Biden’s five-and-a-half years of sobriety and his efforts to repay back taxes as evidence of personal reform.
According to the President’s statement, Biden’s move is a gamble that Americans will empathize with his perspective as a father seeking justice for his son. However, it also risks alienating a public already skeptical of political elites’ perceived immunity from accountability.
Manbilas Singh is a talented writer and journalist who focuses on the finer details in every story and values integrity above everything. A self-proclaimed sleuth, he strives to expose the fine print behind seemingly mundane activities and aims to uncover the truth that is hidden from the general public. In his time away from work, he is a music aficionado and a nerd who revels in video & board games, books and Formula 1.
Comments