Biden Pardons Son Hunter, Shielding Him for Decade

Biden Pardons Hunter, Granting Eleven Years of Retroactive Immunity

The presidential pardon signed by Joe Biden for his son Hunter extends far beyond the existing convictions. The document covers any federal offense potentially committed between January 1, 2014, and December 1, 2024. This grants eleven years of retroactive immunity to a man who had already pleaded guilty to lying on a firearm purchase form and facing nine federal tax charges. The signature came just weeks before leaving office, after White House press secretaries repeatedly denied such a move.

What Exactly Does the Pardon Cover?

Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the president to grant pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. The mechanism is not new; English monarchs used it, and George Washington first exercised it in 1795 for two convicts. What has changed is its application. A traditional pardon excuses someone already convicted of a specific crime, usually for humanitarian or equity reasons. Biden’s pardon expands the umbrella to cover everything that might emerge over an entire decade.

This is the core issue. Hunter Biden was convicted in June for falsely denying illegal drug use on a 2018 gun purchase form and illegally possessing the weapon for eleven days. In September, he pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges just before jury selection began in California. With the signed pardon, neither these convictions nor any future investigations into that period can affect him.

Some argue that the temporal scope addresses the impossibility of knowing what crimes may surface in coming years, and that shielding the past prevents selective prosecution. Counterarguments are simpler: if a pardon covers uninvestigated matters, the message sent is that justice has side doors for those with the right surname.

The Clinton Precedent and Trump’s Father-in-Law

It is not the first time a president has pardoned a family member. Bill Clinton pardoned his brother on his last day in office. Analysts highlight a difference in degree: a specific pardon for a known, adjudicated crime differs from a covert amnesty for an unclosed decade. A Republican precedent also exists: Jared Kushner’s father, husband of Ivanka Trump, was sentenced to two years for tax evasion and later pardoned by Trump at the end of his first term. The symmetry is uncomfortable for both sides.

Democratic reaction has been defensive. Much of the public argument focuses on the idea that Trump would do the same or worse, and that the U.S. judicial system is already de facto politicized. It is the same rhetorical gymnastics criticized when performed by opponents. The result is a country where fewer people believe the law applies equally to the president’s son as to a neighbor filling out a form incorrectly.

The Ukrainian Prosecutor and the Million Dollars

The episode most cited in debates predates this. As vice president, Biden publicly recounted how he conditioned a $1 billion credit line to Ukraine on the dismissal of the state prosecutor within six hours—the time it took him to leave the country. That prosecutor was investigating abusive commissions at a Ukrainian gas company. This anecdote has become central to arguments claiming that shielding the son also protects the father from derived investigations.

The optimistic calculation for the White House is that the pardon closes the chapter and silences media noise. The pessimistic scenario suggests it leaves open the question of what peine during those eleven years that could not be left to a court’s discretion.

A Pattern Repeated Across the Atlantic

The echo in Spain is immediate. Comparisons with recent pardons and amnesties approved there appear in almost every conversation about the case. The phrase summarizing the discontent is not new: laws are like spiderwebs, through which large flies pass free while small ones get trapped, as Balzac wrote. The quote is so repeated it functions as a diagnosis.

The underlying problem is not Biden or Trump. It is a two-party system where each bloc uses the state apparatus to protect its own and wear down the opponent, assuming judicial impartiality is a manual fiction. The pardon of Hunter Biden breaks nothing. It confirms a trend long in the making.

With these elements, the unanswered question remains: what prevents the next president from doing the same with their inner circle? Practically, nothing.