Lawyers for Hunter Biden urged a Delaware federal judge to dismiss the gun charges brought forward by special counsel David Weiss, arguing that the indictment violates an existing immunity deal between the president’s son and the Justice Department.
In at least four separate court motions released Monday, attorneys Abbe Lowell and Bartholomew Dalton asked U.S. district judge Maryellen Noreika to dismiss the three firearms counts, which charge Hunter Biden with illegally owning a gun while on drugs and lying on a federal gun purchase form. Although the gun charges are separate from the nine tax-related charges that were filed in California last week, Hunter Biden’s legal team contend that his collapsed plea deal still shields him from both indictments.
“The Indictment against Mr. Biden must be dismissed because it violates a Diversion Agreement that is in effect between Mr. Biden and the prosecution,” his lawyers wrote in one of the court filings. “In exchange for Mr. Biden giving up various rights — including his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by agreeing to the Statement of Facts drafted by the prosecution and numerous restrictions on his liberty — the prosecution agreed to provide him immunity for any offense concerning his purchase of a firearm (among other offenses).”
The diversion agreement was part of the original plea deal that collapsed in July and would have allowed the president’s son to plead guilty to the two tax charges in exchange for the prosecution dropping the gun charge. The deal collapsed in court after Judge Noreika questioned its unprecedented breadth, pointing out that it would have shielded Hunter from any and all future charges, even those unrelated to his tax and gun crimes, such as charges connected to the foreign influence peddling schemes then being investigated by congressional Republicans.
After the deal collapsed under scrutiny, Hunter pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and one felony gun charge. Weiss filed the firearms indictment in September following the collapsed plea agreement.
After Hunter Biden pleaded not guilty to all three firearms charges in October, Lowell suggested the defense planned on filing a motion to dismiss the gun charges over the diversion agreement, which he maintained was still in effect between both parties.
In addition to the immunity deal, Lowell and Dalton also argued that the federal ban prohibiting drug users from possessing firearms violates the Second Amendment, a line of argument that cuts directly against Joe Biden’s position on the scope of the Second Amendment.
“Because persons protected by the Second Amendment can no longer be denied gun ownership due simply to past drug use — a practice inconsistent with this nation’s historical tradition on firearm regulation — any false statement by Mr. Biden concerning his status as having used a controlled substance no longer concerns ‘any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale’ of a firearm,” Biden’s lawyers wrote.
Hunter’s attorneys also argue that the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden is unlawful and that the case is a “selective and vindictive prosecution” pushed by former president Donald Trump and congressional Republicans.
“After five years of a thorough (and what was and must continue to be a very expensive) investigation, U.S. Attorney David Weiss, a holdover from the Trump administration, decided to resolve the entire investigation of Mr. Biden through a Diversion Agreement concerning a firearm charge and a separate Plea Agreement to resolve tax-related misdemeanor charges,” the attorneys wrote.
Hunter Biden’s former lawyer Chris Clark also criticized the prosecution in crafting a two-part structure to the plea deal, which was meant to “protect Mr. Biden from being charged for the same conduct by a possible future Trump-led DOJ.” Clark left his client after the deal collapsed this summer.