The Justice Department (DOJ) faced challenges following the announcement of clemency grants by former President Joe Biden. Internal emails revealed confusion over the details and implications of these decisions, including errors and a lack of vetting, which drew criticism from attorneys and officials.
Records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show DOJ staff struggled to interpret some of Biden’s clemency decisions. An example involved prosecutors questioning if Biden had commuted a separate sentence for a crack-cocaine trafficking offender, which was not explicitly listed. A deputy pardon attorney suggested the ‘most sensible reading,’ admitting that many of Biden’s commutations bypassed normal procedures.
Hunter Biden’s pardon caused further confusion. The Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA) had to correct a notice describing Hunter Biden’s pardon as occurring ‘after completion of sentence,’ even though he had not been sentenced. Officials spent days authenticating and transmitting the pardon to the court.
U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland questioned the validity of commutations, noting the lack of consultation with judges and victims. Former Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares commented on the disparity between public perception and the reality of the process.
Protect the Public’s Trust criticized the rushed pardon process. They revealed that clemency officials did not perform individual reviews for about 1,500 people granted clemency, who were identified by the Bureau of Prisons and DOJ during COVID home confinement under the CARES Act.
Concerns within DOJ surfaced immediately after Biden’s grants. Emails showed the department was not consulted, and the process lacked coordination. An email from the U.S. Pardon Attorney Liz Oyer confirmed the office’s surprise over Hunter Biden’s pardon.
More emails revealed efforts to rectify errors related to the commutations. The White House’s inclusion of individuals rejected by DOJ highlighted inconsistencies.
DOJ records do not clarify the full selection process outside of OPA. Presidents from both parties have used their clemency authority without department consultation, though it deviates from typical practices.
Former Pardon Attorney Margaret Love described these departures from tradition, noting that the process seemed secretive even to DOJ staff.
Inquiries into the selection and evaluation of recipients were unanswered, evidenced by Judge Hovland’s concerns over fraud cases and drug-trafficking commutations, which lacked consultation with judicial authorities.
The Justice Department acknowledged post-grant errors, attributing them to a failure by the White House to provide timely information. The department highlighted longstanding reliance on its office for neutral advice, though certain clemency grants missed this step.
These developments underscore questions about the procedures leading to Biden’s clemencies. DOJ records showed varied notification approaches, including advance calls to U.S. attorneys before federal death-row commutations.