The Bidens: Lawbreakers Or Law-Abiding Citizens?

Joe Biden, the 46th and current president of the United States, has been accused of breaking the law on several occasions. One of the most notable instances involves his decision to authorise airstrikes in Yemen, which some members of the US Congress charged as a violation of the Constitution. However, provisions in US law give the White House authority to launch limited foreign military action.

In another instance, Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who was convicted of federal gun charges and tax evasion. This decision sparked criticism and accusations of favouritism, with some arguing that Biden placed himself and his family above the law.

Additionally, Biden has been criticised for his handling of the southern border, with high immigration levels leading to concerns about national security and public health.

Despite these accusations, Biden has also been recognised for his efforts to strengthen democracy and preserve the will of the people. He has taken steps to increase voter access and security, combat political violence and hate-fuelled crimes, and advance equality and racial justice.

Pardoning Hunter Biden

On the 1st of December 2024, President Joe Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, for all offenses against the United States he committed or may have committed from the 1st of January 2014 to the 1st of December 2024. This included federal tax charges and felony gun charges.

In a statement, Biden said:

> "I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted... No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong."

Biden had previously pledged not to pardon his son, and his decision to do so outraged some of his supporters. In an interview with USA Today, Biden defended his decision, saying:

> "Speaking of pardons, every parent can understand why you would want to protect your son... I hope it doesn't set a precedent for future presidents to abuse pardon powers."

Ordering Yemen airstrikes

In January 2024, some members of the U.S. Congress charged that President Joe Biden had violated the Constitution by authorizing overnight strikes on Yemen. These strikes were carried out by U.S. and British warplanes, ships, and submarines, targeting Houthi forces in retaliation for months of attacks on Red Sea shipping.

Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that Congress must authorize war, not the president. However, Article 2 designates the president as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, granting them the authority to use military force without congressional authorization for defensive purposes. Supporters of Biden's decision argue that responding to attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria, as well as commercial ships in the Red Sea, constitutes a defensive purpose.

The War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973, controls the use of force and requires military actions without a declaration of war or specific legal authority to be terminated within 60 days. It also mandates the president to provide Congress with a report within 48 hours of an attack.

Legal and security policy experts suggest that the long-term response will depend on the situation's evolution. Repercussions are considered less likely if the conflict with the Houthis does not escalate and the Biden administration maintains open lines of communication with Congress.

The Biden administration's decision to authorize airstrikes in Yemen has sparked debate among members of Congress and raised questions about the extent of the president's authority to use military force without congressional approval.

Pardoning those convicted of marijuana possession

On October 6, 2022, President Biden issued a presidential proclamation that pardoned many federal and D.C. offenses for simple marijuana possession. This pardon was extended to cover offenses under federal law for attempted possession of marijuana, additional offenses under the D.C. Code for simple marijuana possession, and violations of certain sections of the Code of Federal Regulations involving simple marijuana possession and use.

The pardon lifts barriers to housing, employment, and educational opportunities for thousands of people with prior offenses. It is an expression of forgiveness that does not signify innocence or expunge the conviction. A pardon can, however, remove civil or legal disabilities, such as restrictions on the right to vote, hold office, or sit on a jury.

Biden's pardon only applies to federal offenses, including violations of the U.S. Code, the D.C. Code, and the Code of Federal Regulations. It does not pardon convictions under state law, except for simple possession of marijuana and attempted simple possession of marijuana under the District of Columbia's criminal code.

Biden has called on governors and local leaders to take similar steps to erase marijuana convictions at the state level. He reiterated that no one should be in jail solely due to marijuana use or possession, regardless of whether it is a federal or state offense.

Biden's pardon specifically targeted simple possession, attempted possession, and use of marijuana. It did not pardon offenses with additional elements, such as driving under the influence of marijuana or possession in a correctional facility. It also did not pardon individuals in the U.S. unlawfully at the time of their offense.

To receive the benefits of the pardon, individuals must submit applications to the Justice Department's Pardon Attorney office to obtain certificates of pardon, which can be used for housing and employment purposes.

Pardoning 39 non-violent offenders

On December 12, 2024, President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of roughly 1,500 people and pardoned 39 non-violent offenders in the biggest single-day act of clemency in modern history. The commutations were for people who had served at least a year of home confinement sentences after being released from prison during the coronavirus pandemic. Biden stated that he had the "privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities."

The 39 people pardoned by Biden had been convicted of nonviolent crimes, such as drug offenses, and had turned their lives around. They include a woman who led emergency response teams during natural disasters, a church deacon who has worked as an addiction and youth counselor, a doctoral student in molecular biosciences, and a decorated military veteran.

Biden's decision to pardon these individuals was in line with his administration's commitment to advancing equal justice under the law, promoting public safety, supporting rehabilitation and reentry, and providing meaningful second chances. This act of clemency was a significant step towards reducing sentencing disparities, particularly for non-violent offenders convicted of drug offenses.

In addition to the pardons, Biden also granted clemency to nearly 1,500 individuals on home confinement, many of whom would have received lower sentences if charged under current laws, policies, and practices. These individuals had successfully reintegrated into their families and communities, demonstrating their readiness for a second chance.

Biden's use of his presidential pardon power is a demonstration of his belief in the promise of possibility and second chances for Americans who have shown rehabilitation and a commitment to strengthening their communities.

Violating the War Powers Law

In 2024, some members of the U.S. Congress charged that President Joe Biden violated the Constitution by authorizing overnight strikes on Yemen. Progressive Democrats criticized Biden, noting that Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution requires that Congress authorize war, not the president.

However, the Constitution's Article 2 designates the president as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and gives him the authority to use military force without congressional authorization for defensive purposes. Supporters of Biden's move say that such defensive purposes would include responding to attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria and commercial ships in the Red Sea.

In addition to the constitutional provisions, the use of force is controlled by the War Powers Resolution, which was passed by Congress in 1973 as a check on presidential power in the wake of the Vietnam War. The resolution requires military actions without a declaration of war or specific legal authority to be terminated within 60 days. It also requires the president to provide Congress with a report within 48 hours of an attack, detailing the circumstances that necessitated the action, the authority under which it took place, and the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities.

In the case of the strikes on Yemen, the Biden administration informed Congress of the impending strikes but did not seek its approval. Some legal and security policy experts argued that repercussions were less likely if the conflict with the Houthis did not escalate and the administration kept Congress informed.

Biden's stance on presidential war powers has fluctuated between moderate congressionalist and presidentialist positions over the years. In 1975, during the fall of Saigon, Biden lamented that "time and time again we members of Congress are repeatedly told by the press and presidents that we are incapable of making foreign policy decisions." He expressed the view that Congress was capable of making such decisions, citing its insistence on extricating the U.S. from the Vietnam War.

A decade later, in 1988, Biden co-authored an article in the Georgetown Law Journal, arguing that the War Powers Resolution had failed to fulfill its purpose of encouraging interbranch deliberation and congressional input in use-of-force decisions. The article proposed additional circumstances under which unilateral presidential action would be permitted, including repelling an armed attack on the U.S., responding to a foreign military threat that jeopardizes national interests, and protecting U.S. citizens abroad.

However, in 1989, Biden argued that President Bush lacked the authority to unilaterally use force in Panama. Similarly, after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, Biden endorsed a resolution requiring the president to seek a declaration of war or other statutory authorization before engaging in significant hostilities. He later voted against the 1991 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against Iraq.

When Biden served as Vice President under President Obama, he defended the administration's military intervention in Libya, stating that Obama did not need congressional authorization. This stance was criticized by members of Congress from both parties as a violation of the War Powers Resolution.

In summary, while Biden has expressed support for congressional approval of military actions, his position has evolved over time, and he has defended unilateral executive action in certain circumstances. The War Powers Resolution remains a subject of debate, with questions arising over its consistency with the Constitution and the balance of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

Frequently asked questions