As political power shifts in Washington, a contentious debate is emerging over the possibility of pre-emptive pardons for individuals who could face legal scrutiny by the incoming Trump administration.

Many are nervous about Kash Patel’s plans to reform the FBI and other law enforcement entities. On the surface, the very concept of a pardon that no one asked for (or without a corresponding crime) might seem strange, if not outright unnecessary. Many conservatives argue that if one has done nothing wrong, there’s no need for a pardon and those offered one should refuse. This is plainly not true based on what we have seen.

Pre-emptive pardons, while unconventional, have a legitimate role in our constitutional system. They can provide a shield against politically motivated investigations, prevent the weaponization of the justice system, and allow our government to focus on the issues that matter to the people. There is no doubt that we have seen too much of this in recent years and leaders need to end the cycle of abuse.

The notion of using the justice system to settle political scores should concern every American, regardless of their political affiliation. The next election is always coming. It’s what we do differently that wins, not the status quo.

The Biden administration is pointing to reports that suggest Trump’s inner circle is eyeing individuals who have targeted him, from members of Congress like Adam Schiff, Republican critics like Liz Cheney, or public health figures such as Anthony Fauci. Many of these individuals likely have something to worry about, and they may have committed some bad acts (as often happens with politicians).

However, another round of legal retaliation based on political motivations will only continue a dangerous cycle of expensive and unnecessary investigations. If private people were harmed, they should be able to take legal action — the government should not try to do it for them, especially not high-level officials initiating action behind the scenes.

Some might dismiss these concerns, arguing that such fears are overblown or speculative — and there is surely more political theater at play here. However, Trump’s comments calling for jail time for members of the January 6 Committee and other political opponents show the possibility that political lawfare could very well escalate — as the victim becomes the vindicator.

Pre-emptive pardons, far from being an admission of guilt, can serve as a safeguard against this destructive cycle. They can protect individuals from becoming burdened by costly, time-consuming and demoralizing legal battles over politically motivated charges. Trump is a prime example of the toll such lawfare can take. Despite his proven resilience, the extensive investigations and lawsuits he faced (and continues to deal with) consumed enormous resources — financial and political.

By removing the threat of prosecution for political enemies, pre-emptive pardons could help de-escalate partisanship and refocus the justice system on its mission of protecting the American people.

The Justice Department should be prevented from chasing politically charged cases and instead be focused on dedicating its resources to combating violent crime, addressing the fentanyl epidemic and solving the border crisis. That’s the kind of justice system our nation deserves.

Of course, pre-emptive pardons from must be applied judiciously. They should not serve as a blanket amnesty for wrongdoing but rather as a measured response to the increasing weaponization of our legal system. Their use should be limited to situations where there is clear evidence of politically motivated targeting, ensuring that they bolster justice rather than undermine it.

The pardons will certainly cause entangling legal issues. If wrongdoing has occurred, it should be addressed through proper channels. At a time where political differences are often treated as criminal offenses, pre-emptive pardons can provide protections against the erosion of justice.

Many conservatives are critical and are calling out the Biden administration’s discussion of pre-emptive pardons as hypocritical or self-serving. Many are pointing to the precedent it sets and the optics it creates. True leadership requires making tough decisions to protect the principles that matter most — fairness, accountability and the rule of law. Pre-emptive pardons, used wisely, can uphold these principles, move forward, and help steer our nation back from the brink of perpetual political warfare.

So yes, the administration should seriously consider pre-emptive pardons for those who could be targeted. Not because they are guilty but because they deserve to be protected from a system increasingly exploited for political gain. Let’s focus on the real challenges facing our nation and leave political vendettas in the past. The American people deserve no less.

Shaun McCutcheon is a political activist and free speech champion. He won the 2014 Supreme Court case McCutcheon v. FEC. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.