Former President Joe Biden’s last-minute clemency spree has turned into a legal quagmire that even the sharpest minds at the Justice Department couldn’t untangle.
In a whirlwind of controversy, Biden’s final days in office saw nearly 2,500 federal inmates granted clemency through autopen-signed warrants, igniting internal chaos at the DOJ over vague language and misleading White House claims.
On January 17, 2025, Biden rolled out three sweeping clemency warrants, all signed via autopen, affecting a staggering number of federal prisoners. This wasn’t a quiet farewell gesture—it was a bureaucratic bombshell. Senior DOJ officials were left scrambling to make sense of the orders as confusion reigned supreme.
The very next day, January 18, 2025, Bradley Weinsheimer, a top career official at the DOJ, fired off a pointed message to White House counsel and the Office of the Pardon Attorney. He flagged the murky wording of one warrant, calling it “highly problematic” and warning it could be unenforceable without clear direction.
Weinsheimer didn’t mince words, noting the warrant’s reference to “offenses described to the Department of Justice” was a legal mess waiting to happen. He urged the White House to provide a detailed list of inmates and their specific offenses to avoid unintended consequences. Without it, he cautioned, even violent felons might slip through the cracks.
Speaking of unintended consequences, Weinsheimer also highlighted a glaring discrepancy in the White House’s narrative. He bluntly told them to stop claiming the clemency was limited to “non-violent drug offenders,” calling the statement misleading at best. The truth, it seems, was far less palatable.
The DOJ’s internal review uncovered 19 particularly troubling commutations, with at least 16 inmates ultimately receiving clemency despite serious concerns. Among them were individuals with chilling records of violence, hardly fitting the “non-violent” label peddled by the administration.
Take Russell McIntosh, for instance, who was convicted of killing a woman and her toddler to safeguard his drug empire. Or Steven Fowler, whose enforcer tortured an informant with a butane torch, and Plaze Anderson, tied to multiple murders and kidnappings as a Gangster Disciples member. These are the faces behind Biden’s historic clemency push—hardly the harmless figures portrayed.
Yet, the White House doubled down with a statement in Biden’s name, touting the mass commutations as relief for “non-violent drug offenses” and the largest clemency action in U.S. history. Such spin raises eyebrows when internal emails show DOJ officials openly challenging this rosy depiction. It’s a disconnect that’s tough to ignore.
In a July 2024 interview with the New York Times, Biden dismissed Republican critiques of the autopen’s use as “ridiculous and false.” He insisted he oversaw all clemency decisions, using the autopen merely as a practical tool for the sheer volume of cases. But does delegating signatures to a machine equate to personal oversight?
Biden further explained he approved broad categories of inmates for clemency, leaving staff to apply those standards. While that might sound efficient, internal DOJ emails reveal uncertainty among officials about what exactly Biden ordered. It’s hard to square “personal decision-making” with such widespread confusion.
Weinsheimer’s push for clarity—a list of each inmate and their covered offenses as the “least problematic alternative”—went unanswered in the available records. His insistence on interpreting the warrant “in the manner intended by the President” underscores a troubling gap between intent and execution. This isn’t just a paperwork snafu; it’s a policy failure.
Adding another layer of intrigue, Weinsheimer, described as a nonpolitical career ethics lawyer, has faced scrutiny from conservatives for past actions, including meetings with Hunter Biden’s defense counsel in 2023. While unrelated to the clemency debacle, it fuels concerns about politicization within the DOJ—a worry that persists across administrations.
After a change in leadership in February 2025, Weinsheimer was reassigned to a task force on sanctuary cities but opted for a federal employee buyout instead. Meanwhile, efforts to uncover more internal DOJ emails about the clemency orders continue, as the Oversight Project seeks answers. The saga is far from over.
Ultimately, this episode leaves a bitter taste for those who value precision and transparency in governance. Biden’s clemency blitz, while perhaps well-intentioned, stumbled over vague directives and questionable messaging, risking public trust. If we’re to reform criminal justice, let’s do it with clarity—not chaos—and ensure the process respects the gravity of each case.