The federal judge presiding over Hunter Biden’s gun charges in Delaware on Friday declined the president’s son’s request to dismiss the indictment.
Mr. Biden was charged with knowingly making false statements, including in writing, in connection with acquiring the gun, and he was charged with possession of a gun by a prohibited person.
Last December, Mr. Biden submitted several motions to dismiss the charges.
The motions argued that a now-defunct plea bargain that fell apart last summer invalidated his gun charges in exchange for a guilty plea on tax misdemeanors.
They also argued that special counsel David Weiss was “unlawfully appointed” and yielded to “political pressure” when bringing the case against Mr. Biden and that the gun charges are unconstitutional.
Lastly, the motions argued to dismiss based on a “selective and vindictive prosecution.”
U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika declined to dismiss the charges on those grounds in three separate filings on Friday.
Judge Noreika stated in her decision that the arguments of Mr. Biden’s legal team claiming that external influences tainted the special counsel’s decision to pursue the case was “all speculation.”
She found that they failed to provide substantial evidence to support their allegations.
Judge Noreika, appointed by President Donald Trump, also invalidated the motion to dismiss based on immunity from a now-defunct plea deal.
Collapse of Plea Deal
Last September, Mr. Biden was indicted on three gun-related charges. Two counts related to not disclosing his drug use during a purchase and another count related to unlawfully possessing a firearm while addicted to a controlled substance.He pleaded not guilty to all charges after negotiations with the government collapsed on a plea deal that would have seen the president’s son plead guilty to two tax offenses in order to sidestep a formal firearm-related charge under certain terms.
The plea deal was put on hold, prompting Abe Lowell, Mr. Biden’s attorney, to accuse the Department of Justice of changing their decision “on the fly.”
“One, they wrote something and weren’t clear what they meant. Two, they knew what they meant and misstated it to counsel. Or third, they change their view as they were standing in court in Delaware,” Mr. Lowell told CBS News at the time.
Mr. Biden’s legal team has also fought to hold onto his immunity because he gave up “valuable rights” in the defunct plea deal.
Prosecution ‘Politically Motivated’
Last December, Mr. Lowell told MSNBC he believed the prosecution was politically motivated and that Mr. Weiss should have accepted the plea deal.“Are you asking whether he should have accountability for the mistakes he made while he was addicted? Sure he should. And if the U.S. attorney had followed through, and continued on what was supposed to happen in June, there would have been accountability,” Mr. Lowell said.
The plea bargain was heavily criticized by House Republicans, many of whom are involved in investigations into the financial affairs of the Biden family, as a sweetheart deal.
During Mr. Biden’s initial arraignment in Delaware, the federal judge raised concerns about the terms of the deal, leading to its collapse within minutes.
Mr. Weiss subsequently withdrew both the case and the agreement, which Mr. Lowell contends is a breach of protocol.
In addition to the three gun crimes, Mr. Biden faces nine tax crimes in California.
