This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s newsletter dedicated to politics. Subscribe here to get similar stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Although President Joe Biden maintained a calm exterior publicly, insiders speculated that he might eventually intervene to stop the federal legal actions against his son.

The surprise announcement on Sunday regarding a comprehensive pardon for Hunter Biden ignited significant debate in Washington. Conversations began swirling about the potential ramifications for Biden’s legacy, the implications for the already fragile reputation of the Justice Department, and whether President-elect Donald Trump, who has his own legal troubles, would interpret the pardon as a definitive action. The atmosphere was intense, urgent, and predictably divisive.

However, a closer look at Biden’s decision to wield a largely unchecked constitutional power sheds light on his reasoning. It’s true that Biden reversed a firm stance against using his authority to shield his son. His decision indeed contradicts long-standing Democratic critiques of Trump, which assert that no one is above the law, regardless of their presidential ties. Additionally, this move could overshadow Biden’s final phase in office, drawing attention away from his attempts to cement his legacy after a lengthy political career.

Nonetheless, these critiques overlook a crucial reality: Joe Biden was faced with a more intricate dilemma than simply choosing whether to protect his only surviving son from imprisonment. Many will brand this as a self-serving decision driven by parental instinct. However, it might also represent one of the most calculated choices Biden has made this year—perhaps even more so than his shocking announcement in July that he would not seek reelection as the Democratic nominee.

Here are six factors that clarify Biden’s rationale for issuing a roughly 200-word pardon:

Trump has made it clear he intends to investigate the Bidens.

For years, Hunter Biden’s ties to a Ukrainian energy company have fascinated conservative audiences, many of whom suspect that payments to him were a facade for illicit financial activities involving Joe Biden. (Much of the GOP’s narrative against the Bidens has been debunked, and their impeachment efforts against Joe Biden have stalled.) With Trump likely to reclaim control of the Justice Department and the FBI—potentially under a loyalist who supports aggressive tactics against opponents—there were concerns that the President-elect would prioritize investigating Hunter Biden even if he were incarcerated. Biden’s sweeping pardon effectively eliminated any such legal pursuit, as federal charges could no longer be filed against Hunter.

Hunter Biden’s legal issues were handled unusually.

This fact is indisputable. Experts generally agree that if anyone else faced similar charges, they would likely be offered a standard plea deal—one that had been proposed but rejected by a Trump-appointed judge due to its unusual breadth. The prosecution grew even more unconventional once the Trump-nominated U.S. Attorney for Delaware was assigned as special counsel in Hunter Biden’s case. With this special designation, David Weiss went on to secure convictions on three federal felony counts related to illegal firearm purchases and nine guilty pleas on tax-related charges. Hunter was set to receive a sentence for the firearm conviction on December 12, with a subsequent tax evasion sentencing scheduled for December 16. If he had received maximum penalties—considered unlikely—he could have faced up to 42 years in prison.

Inaction was not a viable option.

Indeed, Biden’s change of heart came without any apology. He had been traveling the globe—literally—asserting that the justice system was treating both his son and Trump equitably. He was aware that he would face backlash from some of the same individuals whose approval he has sought for years. However, the electorate made its decision regarding Biden’s strict adherence to the rule of law when they chose to reinstate Trump. In fact, Trump had hinted at granting mass pardons to individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, insurrection. Voters seemed to find that idea appealing—or at least not disqualifying—and opted to bring Trump back into power.

If Trump believes he can effortlessly erase legal troubles without repercussions, perhaps Biden is justified in assuming he enjoys similar latitude. After all, Trump’s first term included clemency for individuals like former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, former NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik, and “junk-bond king” Michael Milken. Trump also utilized his pardoning power to absolve five aides, three military personnel accused of war crimes, seven disgraced former Congress members—all Republicans—and ten healthcare providers involved in a significant Medicare fraud case.

Given this backdrop, what if Hunter Biden’s impending sentencing resulted in years in prison for offenses that experts argue are rarely prosecuted? How would the public have reacted if Joe Biden, nearing the end of his presidency, had opted not to use his pardon power to assist his own son?

Family is central to the Biden ethos.

Throughout his extensive political journey, Joe Biden has championed the notion that the judicial system should operate independently of politics. However, this belief collided with a competing principle: the importance of family above all else. The President’s grief over losing his son Beau has influenced many decisions made by the Biden family over the past decade and likely shaped his perspective as he contemplated the prospect of his grandchildren spending even more time without their father. Although politically charged, this decision wasn’t entirely unexpected. Remember when an Iowan confronted Biden about Hunter’s involvement in Ukraine back in December 2019? He labeled the individual “a damned liar” and challenged him to a push-up contest. Biden later pledged to uphold his family’s integrity if elected.

Moreover, Hunter Biden has openly discussed his battle with addiction and has seemingly made strides to turn his life around after some poor decisions. A lengthy prison sentence would likely impart little wisdom to him that he hasn’t already learned. This reasoning may have played a part in Joe Biden’s choice to grant the pardon.

Biden operated with few limitations.

The power to grant pardons is absolute and rests solely with the President. There is no need for Congressional approval, nor does anyone in his administration possess the authority to stop him. That’s why when Biden stated on June 13, “I will not pardon him,” some were skeptical. A pardon was always a possibility, regardless of his aides’ insistence that he should remain uninvolved concerning Hunter. How else can one interpret Biden’s invitation to Hunter for a state dinner shortly after the younger Biden attempted to negotiate a deal with federal prosecutors, with the Attorney General present at the same event? Despite Hunter’s past struggles, he still holds sway within his father’s inner circle as the eldest living child in a once-prominent political family.

This will be a trying moment, but it may only be temporary.

The White House shared the news late Sunday, coinciding with Biden’s departure on his final international trip as President. This timing keeps him away from Washington until Thursday, without a formal press conference planned, a strategy reminiscent of a recent trip to South America that featured limited media engagement. This leaves plenty of room for the narrative surrounding Biden’s apparent breach of his commitment not to grant a pardon to unfold. Onboard Air Force One, the White House’s chief spokesperson reaffirmed the decision, and on Monday, during a welcome event for National Guard members viewing the holiday decorations, First Lady Jill Biden faced questions about the pardon. “Of course I support the pardon for my son,” Dr. Biden stated in the State Dining Room of the White House.

Additionally, Washington is currently dealing with its usual end-of-year budgetary pressures; this year, Congress has until December 20 to negotiate spending, with significant divisions over how far to extend funding into Trump’s second term. Essentially, the pardon is unlikely to remain a primary concern for most Americans, and Trump will likely find ways to shift public focus as Biden’s administration races against the clock.

Stay updated on the key issues in Washington. Subscribe to the D.C. Brief newsletter.