President Donald Trump is weighing sweeping preemptive pardons for members of his administration before leaving office, a move that would shield aides and allies from investigations Democrats have openly signaled they intend to pursue. The Wall Street Journal reported the discussions, which include the possibility of issuing anticipatory or even blanket pardons before any formal charges are brought.
The reported deliberations come as Democratic lawmakers and allied groups have increasingly signaled plans to scrutinize the Trump administration once the president leaves office. Party leaders have pointed to a range of issues they say warrant further investigation, and some Democratic lawmakers and legal analysts have questioned U.S. strikes on Iranian infrastructure, arguing that certain actions could raise legal concerns.
Trump has rejected those criticisms. He has repeatedly defended his use of clemency as a necessary check on what he calls "an unfair justice system," and he has argued that he and those close to him have been unfairly targeted. The discussions reported by the Journal would dramatically expand his use of executive clemency, and would represent a direct counter to what his allies describe as politically driven probes.
If the prospect of preemptive pardons sounds familiar, it should. The Biden White House engaged in nearly identical deliberations before leaving office. Fox News reported that White House counsel Ed Siskel organized talks with senior Biden aides about possible preemptive pardons for Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Rep. Liz Cheney, and Rep. Adam Schiff, all figures who could have faced scrutiny under the incoming Trump administration.
Those discussions intensified after Trump named Kash Patel as his choice for FBI director, amid concerns about possible investigations or indictments in the next administration. Biden himself had not yet been directly involved in the deliberations at the time, senior Democrats told Politico.
Schiff, for his part, urged Biden not to follow through. "I would urge the president not to do that," Schiff told Politico. "I think it would seem defensive and unnecessary."
Trump has continued to use his pardon power broadly throughout his presidency, including granting clemency to five former NFL players in a recent round of pardons that extended his already expansive record on executive clemency.
The Biden-era pardon discussions went well beyond talk. Biden issued a sweeping pardon for his son Hunter Biden, a decision that drew sharp criticism from both sides of the aisle. Biden framed it as a response to selective prosecution, stating: "From the day I took office, 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."
That pardon set off a broader debate about executive clemency and its limits. National Review reported that White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined on December 6, 2024, to rule out additional preemptive pardons for Biden allies, even for figures who were not under investigation or facing charges at the time.
"Recently announced Trump appointees for law enforcement have said on the campaign that they were out for retribution," Jean-Pierre said, offering the administration's rationale for considering the pardons.
The list of potential Biden-era pardon recipients reportedly included Fauci, Cheney, former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley, Schiff, and others involved in Trump investigations, impeachments, or January 6 proceedings. Breitbart reported that White House lawyers actively studied preemptive pardons, and that Biden discussed the matter with senior aides.
The scope of those deliberations was notable. CBS News reported at the time that those eligible for preemptive legal relief included "well-known names at the center of many of the most rancorous moments of the first Trump administration."
One detail in the Journal's reporting stands out: Trump has issued clemency to large numbers of allies and supporters, often bypassing traditional Justice Department vetting processes. Former Justice Department officials and legal experts cited by the Journal said sweeping preemptive pardons would be largely unprecedented in scope.
The Justice Department's own internal structure has been a source of controversy throughout the Trump presidency, with debates over how the department handles politically sensitive matters and whether its processes serve accountability or obstruction.
Still, the constitutional authority of the president to issue pardons is broad and well-established. The pardon power extends to federal offenses and has historically been used both before and after charges, though blanket preemptive pardons covering conduct that has not yet been formally investigated would test the outer boundaries of that authority.
The political context matters. Democrats have not been shy about their intentions. Party leaders and allied groups have publicly outlined areas they believe warrant investigation once Trump leaves office. Some of those areas touch on military action, including U.S. strikes on Iranian infrastructure that Democratic lawmakers have questioned on legal grounds.
What makes the current debate revealing is not the legal question, presidents have broad pardon authority, full stop, but the political framing. When Biden's team weighed preemptive pardons for Fauci, Cheney, and Milley, the justification was that Trump might misuse law enforcement for political revenge. When Trump considers similar action, the framing flips: now it is obstruction, or evidence of guilt, or an abuse of power.
The contrast is worth sitting with. Biden pardoned his own son. His White House openly discussed pardoning political allies who had not been charged with anything. His press secretary declined to rule out further preemptive pardons on national television. And the rationale offered each time was the same one Trump now invokes: the system is being weaponized.
Controversies over politically motivated pardons are hardly limited to the federal level. But the stakes are highest when the White House is involved, and when the pardons are designed not to correct a past injustice but to pre-empt a future one.
The appointment of FBI Director Kash Patel was itself cited by Biden allies as a trigger for their own pardon discussions, a sign that personnel choices at the top of federal law enforcement carry weight far beyond the confirmation vote.
The Journal's reporting leaves key questions open. No specific aides or allies have been named as pardon recipients. The timing remains vague, "before leaving office", and no primary documents or official statements beyond Trump's public defense of his clemency record have surfaced.
Whether Trump ultimately issues preemptive pardons, and how broad they turn out to be, will depend on how seriously he takes the Democratic threat of post-presidency investigations. The legal authority is there. The precedent, thanks in no small part to Biden, is there too.
When one side builds the weapon, it shouldn't be surprised when the other side picks it up.