In his final days in office, President Joe Biden issued a series of high-profile pardons that ignited fierce debate and stirred widespread concern over their potential impact on the individuals and the nation.

Dr. Anthony Fauci and former Republican Representative Liz Cheney, both prominent figures in polarizing national debates, were notably among those pardoned. While the White House framed the move as a proactive measure to shield them from potential repercussions under a Republican-led Congress and former President Donald Trump, legal experts warn of unforeseen consequences that could arise from this controversial strategy.

As a new GOP-controlled Congress vows rigorous oversight and investigations into actions taken during and after Biden’s presidency, these pardons arrive during a time of deep political polarization. Liz Cheney, a prominent Trump critic and co-chair of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack, has faced significant backlash from her own party. Meanwhile, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former Chief Medical Advisor to the President, has been a frequent target of conservative ire due to his prominent role in shaping COVID-19 policies.

White House advisers revealed that concerns over politically motivated prosecutions under the incoming administration were the driving force behind the decision to issue the pardons. Reports suggest that President Biden viewed this move as a way to protect Cheney, Fauci, and other key figures who played pivotal roles in advancing investigations and policies central to his administration’s legacy.
“President Biden believes in safeguarding public servants who have devoted their lives to defending democracy and promoting public health,” a senior White House official stated. “These pardons are intended to uphold fairness and shield these individuals from partisan retribution, not to imply absolution of guilt.”

While pardons are usually granted to individuals already convicted of crimes, they can also be issued preemptively, as seen in this case, to mitigate potential legal risks. However, the decision has not been without controversy. Although pardons shield individuals from prosecution for specific offenses, legal experts highlight their limitations.
Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall explained that pardons do not exempt recipients from testifying under oath if subpoenaed. Moreover, they offer no protection against perjury charges or obstruction of justice if a recipient provides false testimony. This nuance has fueled debate over the broader implications of such preemptive pardons.

Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall suggested that the pardons might inadvertently expose Liz Cheney and Dr. Anthony Fauci to new risks. “While they may be shielded from prosecution for specific offenses covered by the pardons, they remain vulnerable to political and legal consequences for any future actions, particularly amid congressional investigations,” he noted. Binnall also warned that preemptively pardoning individuals who haven’t been charged with crimes could undermine public trust in the fairness of the legal system. “Such actions risk creating the perception of wrongdoing where none has been proven,” he added.
Criticism has emerged from across the political spectrum. Progressive Democrats worry that these pardons may erode confidence in the administration’s commitment to transparency, while some Republicans view them as a desperate attempt to shield allies from scrutiny. Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy dismissed the pardons as a “political stunt” aimed at “protecting Biden’s cronies.” McCarthy emphasized that the GOP-led Congress would intensify its oversight efforts, including issuing subpoenas to figures like Cheney and Fauci. “No pardon can absolve anyone of accountability to the American people,” McCarthy declared.

Several Democrats have raised alarms over the potential long-term consequences of preemptive pardons, fearing that future administrations might exploit the precedent. Senator Elizabeth Warren commented, “While I understand the president’s intentions, this approach risks undermining the principle of equal justice under the law.”
Although the White House has not disclosed the specific actions covered by the pardons, officials hinted they relate to Cheney’s work on the January 6 Committee and Fauci’s role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Legal scholars are calling for greater transparency to address growing criticism and speculation. “Without clarity on what these pardons entail, it’s challenging to evaluate their legal and ethical implications,” noted Kimberly Wehle, a constitutional law professor. She urged the administration to openly explain the rationale behind the pardons to avoid further politicization.
Despite the pardons, Cheney and Fauci are unlikely to escape scrutiny. Legal experts emphasize that while pardons provide protection from prosecution for certain crimes, they do not offer blanket immunity from accountability. Congressional investigators are expected to closely examine both individuals, keeping them under the spotlight in the ongoing political and legal discourse.

Kimberly Wehle emphasized the legal obligations of Cheney and Fauci despite the pardons, stating, “They are still required to answer questions truthfully if called to testify before Congress. A pardon does not exempt them from scrutiny or give them license to mislead legislators.”
With Republicans signaling plans to investigate issues such as the origins of COVID-19, the Biden administration’s pandemic response, and the January 6 inquiry, the likelihood of subpoenas looms large. While Cheney and Fauci have expressed willingness to cooperate with legitimate investigations, they have also raised concerns about potential politically motivated harassment.
President Biden’s decision to issue these pardons reflects the intricate political landscape he is navigating. While the pardons may provide a degree of protection for Cheney, Fauci, and others, they come with significant risks—not only for the individuals involved but also for the broader reputation of the administration.
“The president has made a bold but controversial choice,” Wehle observed. “Only time will tell whether these pardons achieve their intended purpose or backfire by inviting even greater scrutiny and criticism.”

One thing is certain as the legal and political battles unfold: the controversy surrounding these pardons is poised to remain a central issue in the weeks and months ahead. This contentious decision will undoubtedly shape the narrative of President Biden’s legacy while fueling the agenda of the newly Republican-led Congress.