Hunter Biden Cites Tossing Of Trump Docs Case In Bid To Dismiss Tax Charges

WASHINGTON, DC. (THECOUNT) — Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, has requested federal judges dismiss his tax and gun cases, leveraging a recent ruling in Florida that dismissed a prosecution against former President Donald Trump.

The requests, filed Thursday in federal courts in Delaware and California, highlights U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon‘s ruling, which nullified the classified documents case against Trump. Cannon concluded that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith, who prosecuted Trump, was unconstitutional since Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him directly, bypassing Senate confirmation.

Hunter Biden’s legal team argues that the same rationale should apply to his cases, seeking the dismissal of a tax prosecution in Los Angeles and a firearm case in Delaware. Both cases are overseen by judges appointed by Trump. Biden’s lawyers highlighted that the special counsel who prosecuted him, David Weiss, was similarly appointed by Garland under the same authority.

Despite the rejection of similar arguments in the past, Hunter Biden’s lawyers believe recent legal developments justify reconsideration. They cited a recent opinion by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas questioning the legitimacy of special counsel appointments.

Hunter Biden was convicted in June of lying about his drug use on a federal form to purchase a firearm in 2018. He faces up to 25 years in prison but, as a first-time offender, is unlikely to receive the maximum sentence. The tax case involves over $1.4 million in unpaid taxes, which have since been settled.

The FBI’s ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden had initially appeared close to a resolution with a plea deal, but the agreement fell apart after a judge raised concerns. Biden was subsequently indicted in both cases.

A spokesperson for Weiss acknowledged the filings and indicated that responses would follow in due course. The case continues to attract significant attention due to its high-profile nature and the potential impact on the legal landscape surrounding special counsel appointments.

DEVELOPING::