President Joe Biden's 'Pardon' Violates the Constitution: No One Is Above the Law—Not Even Hunter Biden

"Imagine if every president could pardon their family members or close allies in this way. It would create a two-tiered justice system..."

President Joe Biden should be required, by law, to explicitly list every crime for which he intends to pardon his son, Hunter Biden. Anything less than full disclosure not only erodes public trust but also raises profound constitutional questions about the misuse of executive power. If the president issues a blanket pardon—granting his son immunity without clearly specifying the offenses—it could establish a dangerous precedent that undermines the rule of law.

A blanket pardon of this nature is an affront to the Constitution. Legal scholars and historians alike agree: the Founding Fathers did not intend for the pardon power to serve as a get-out-of-jail-free card for the politically connected. The framers envisioned a government rooted in accountability and transparency, yet here we are, watching the very pillars of justice wobble under the weight of partisan abuse.

If Hunter Biden were allowed to walk away from his legal troubles without the American public knowing the full extent of his wrongdoing, it would signal open season for corruption. Worse, it would grant Hunter Biden something no other U.S. citizen enjoys: absolute immunity from prosecution. Such a privilege flies in the face of the most basic principle of our justice system—"No one is above the law."

Blanket immunity for any U.S. citizen is unconstitutional and ripe for legal challenge. The precedent it sets is chilling. Imagine if every president could pardon their family members or close allies in this way. It would create a two-tiered justice system: one for the elite, who can commit crimes without consequence, and another for everyone else.

The U.S. Constitution addresses the presidential pardon power in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, known as the Pardon Clause. It states:

“The President shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

If those crimes are not listed in the presidential pardon, then it is of highly dubious constitutionality.

The U.S. Constitution grants broad pardon powers, including the ability to issue pardons preemptively, even before charges are filed. However, the Constitution does not explicitly address whether a president can issue a "blanket pardon" for all past crimes.

The closest parallel to the Hunter Biden presidential pardon is that of President Gerald Ford for the newly resigned President Richard Nixon. However, last time anyone checked, Hunter Biden was never President of the United States.

Hunter Biden’s alleged crimes range from tax evasion to foreign business dealings that raise serious national security concerns. These accusations deserve to be fully aired in a court of law. A blanket pardon not only denies justice to the American people but it also prevents the truth from coming to light.

Furthermore, President Joe Biden’s prevarication on the campaign trail that he would not pardon Hunter Biden sets the table for another challenge for the U.S. Constitution. Would President Joe Biden dare to pardon himself?

Joe Biden allegedly committed crimes when he was not President of the United States, such as the egregious mishandling of sensitive national security documents. Special Counsel Robert Hur nonetheless declined to file charges against him for the offenses, in part because he believed a jury would find him a "sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

If President Joe Biden pardoned himself for any crimes he might have committed while in the Oval Office or before he became president, it would set the stage for another critical test of the U.S. Constitution. Legal scholars are divided over whether presidents can pardon themselves. The Constitution does not explicitly prohibit it, but such an act would test legal bounds.

What are the Bidens trying to hide? If the president believes Hunter’s actions are defensible, why not lay the facts on the table and let the legal system decide?

The Biden administration often parrots the phrase, "No one is above the law." But this platitude rings hollow when applied selectively. If President Biden were to pardon his son without transparency, it would amount to a de facto admission that some individuals—those with the right last name—are indeed above the law.

For justice to prevail, a Hunter Biden pardon must not be allowed to proceed in the shadows. Any crimes he is being pardoned for should be disclosed in full. Congress should demand oversight, and the courts should be prepared to challenge the constitutionality of such a broad and unprecedented abuse of power.

This issue isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about preserving the integrity of our legal system and ensuring that the Constitution remains a document of accountability, not a shield for the powerful. If we fail to address this now, we risk losing the trust of the American people in their government. And once that trust is gone, it’s nearly impossible to restore.