In the final days of his presidency, Joe Biden issued a series of last-minute pardons to individuals, including Liz Cheney and Dr. Anthony Fauci, to protect them from potential retribution under the incoming Trump administration. Biden’s aides indicated the pardons were meant to shield these figures from backlash amid ongoing investigations into Biden’s administration. While the pardons prevent prosecution for past actions, legal experts noted they don’t stop individuals from being compelled to testify in congressional hearings or ongoing investigations.

Legal observers pointed out that figures like Cheney and Fauci could still be subpoenaed by Republican lawmakers, especially in inquiries related to Biden’s administration, such as Cheney’s role in the January 6th committee or Fauci’s pandemic response. By accepting pardons, these individuals waive their right to invoke the Fifth Amendment, potentially compelling them to testify under oath.

Some critics, including former Representative Adam Kinzinger, argued that accepting pardons could damage the recipients’ public image, implying guilt despite no charges. Biden defended the pardons, stating they were issued to protect individuals from politically motivated investigations and to prevent reputational harm caused by prolonged probes.

Despite the controversial nature of the pardons, Biden stood by his decision, asserting they were justified due to the unique circumstances surrounding his administration’s final days. The pardons have sparked continued discussions about the interplay between legal protections, public perception, and political strategy in the closing moments of a presidency.