It happened in the final hours. Just as the moving trucks were pulling away from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in January 2025, Joe Biden picked up the pen. Or, as some critics now claim, the "autopen" did the work for him. Either way, the result was a political earthquake: a full and unconditional preemptive pardon for Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Why?
If you ask the former president, it was about protecting a public servant from "baseless and politically motivated" retribution. If you ask Senator Rand Paul, it was a "cover-up" that forever sealed Fauci’s legacy as a "government scientist pardoned for a crime."
The reality is much messier than a simple headline. We are now a year into the second Trump administration, and the dust still hasn't settled. In fact, the legal validity of that pardon is being questioned in the halls of Congress right now.
The Pardon Heard 'Round the World
Basically, Biden didn't just pardon his son Hunter. He issued a sweeping set of protections for people he believed were in the crosshairs of the incoming administration. This included General Mark Milley, members of the January 6th Committee, and of course, the face of the U.S. pandemic response, Anthony Fauci.
Fauci had been the director of the NIAID for 38 years. He served under seven presidents. But by 2024, he had become a lightning rod. Republicans were already drafting criminal referrals for perjury, specifically regarding his testimony about "gain-of-function" research and the origins of COVID-19 in Wuhan.
The pardon was preemptive. That’s the key part. Fauci hadn't been charged with a crime yet. But Biden saw the writing on the wall. He knew that the new Department of Justice, potentially led by figures like Pam Bondi, would likely take a very different view of Fauci's 2021 Senate testimony.
Was it Actually Legal?
Here is where things get kinda weird.
In late 2025, reports surfaced that many of these last-minute pardons—including Fauci’s—weren't signed by Biden’s hand. They were executed via autopen. Now, autopens are common in D.C. for routine documents, but for a presidential pardon? That’s uncharted territory.
Senator Rand Paul has been all over this. He’s been working with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to dig into whether Biden actually authorized the specific wording of the Fauci pardon. If a staffer pushed the button without the president’s direct sign-off on the final text, does the pardon even hold up?
Some legal experts say the president's intent is all that matters. Others argue that the Pardon Clause of the Constitution requires a more deliberate, personal act. Honestly, we might see this go all the way to the Supreme Court if the current DOJ decides to test it.
The Gain-of-Function Rabbit Hole
To understand why Biden felt he had to do this, you have to look at the 520-page report released by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. They didn't mince words. They called Fauci’s testimony "misleading, at a minimum."
The core of the fight is a technical one.
👉 See also: Manifest Destiny: What Most People Get Wrong About America's Expansion
- Fauci’s Argument: The NIH did not fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan based on the official regulatory definition at the time.
- The Committee’s Argument: The research clearly enhanced the pathogenicity of viruses, which fits the scientific definition of gain-of-function, regardless of how the NIH categorized it on paper.
It's a classic case of Washington semantics. Biden’s team viewed this as a "perjury trap"—a situation where political enemies use technicalities to put an 80-year-old doctor in prison. Trump’s team viewed it as a massive lie that obstructed the search for the pandemic's true origins.
The "Retribution" Defense
Biden’s official statement was clear: "The issuance of these pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgement that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing."
He was worried about money. Specifically, the millions of dollars in legal fees Fauci would have to pay to defend himself against a "weaponized" DOJ. Even if Fauci were ultimately exonerated, the process would be the punishment.
Fauci’s own reaction was a mix of relief and defiance. He told ABC News that he accepted the pardon but doubled down on his innocence. "I have committed no crime," he said. He mentioned the "immeasurable and intolerable distress" the threats had caused his family. You've got to remember, this is a guy who has lived with a security detail for years because of death threats over masking and vaccines.
What Happens Now?
As of January 2026, the legal battle has shifted. While the federal pardon protects Fauci from federal prosecution for anything done during his tenure, it doesn't touch the states.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson is currently leading a coalition of state AGs looking into whether Fauci violated any state laws during the pandemic response. They’re looking at things like the suppression of scientific dissent and the "mismanagement" of public health data.
Can a state prosecute a former federal official for their official duties? It’s a massive "maybe." Usually, federal supremacy protects officials, but these AGs are betting that if they can prove "misconduct" outside the scope of official duty, they might have a shot.
📖 Related: El clima de mañana: Por qué tu aplicación de confianza te miente a veces
The Reality of the "Autopen" Controversy
If you’re following this closely, keep an eye on the "autopen" investigation. If the current administration finds evidence that Biden didn't personally review the Fauci pardon, they might try to declare it "void ab initio"—meaning it never legally existed.
This would be a first in American history. Usually, once a pardon is issued and accepted, it’s a done deal. But then again, nothing about the last few years has been "usual."
Actionable Next Steps for Staying Informed
- Watch the DOJ’s Response to Rand Paul: The Senator recently renewed his criminal referral. If Attorney General Pam Bondi acts on it, it means the administration believes the pardon is either invalid or doesn't cover the specific charges.
- Monitor State-Level Investigations: Keep an eye on the coalition of Attorneys General led by South Carolina. Their findings could lead to civil or criminal filings that the federal pardon can't stop.
- Check the Federal Register: Any formal challenges to the validity of the January 2025 pardons will likely show up in federal court filings first.
- Understand the Scope: Remember that a "preemptive" pardon covers a specific window of time. It doesn't give someone a "get out of jail free" card for things they do after the pardon was signed.
The saga of the Fauci pardon isn't just about one doctor. It’s a test case for how much power an outgoing president has to "pre-clear" his staff before the next person takes the keys. Whether you see it as a shield for a hero or a cloak for a villain, the legal precedent being set right now will change the executive branch forever.
Next Steps: You can track the specific legal challenges to the "autopen" pardons by following the House Oversight Committee's latest hearings, or investigate the state-level inquiries currently being coordinated through the South Carolina Attorney General's office.