We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:


Latest News

Court Upholds Gun Indictment Against Hunter Biden

 May 10, 2024

In a significant legal development, a federal appeals court has declined to dismiss the gun charges against Hunter Biden.

A recent ruling by the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court allows the federal gun indictment against Hunter Biden to proceed to trial, as Newsmax reports.

The court, rejecting the first son's arguments, denied his motion to dismiss the federal gun charges. This decision means that the trial in Delaware will go forward as planned unless a plea agreement is reached in the interim.

Legal representatives for Biden argued that the charges infringed upon his constitutional right to bear arms. The basis of their appeal was that possessing an unloaded firearm for a short period did not pose a public safety threat.

Legal Challenges Surrounding Biden's Gun Ownership

In 2018, Biden was charged with acquiring and possessing a revolver during a period when he was allegedly using illicit drugs, a scenario that federal law prohibits. These charges have sparked considerable debate over the application of gun laws and constitutional rights.

Biden's attorneys contended that the specific circumstances of Biden's gun ownership did not justify the charges. They highlighted that the weapon was unloaded and retained for only 11 days.

Appeals Court Rejects Motion to Dismiss

Despite these arguments, the appeals court supported the lower court's decision, stating that such orders from the District Court are not appealable before a final judgment. This technicality played a crucial role in the court's ruling.

The court's decision reinforces the stance that the trial must continue through the normal judicial process, potentially leading to a full trial unless an agreement is reached beforehand.

Upcoming Trial and Plea Possibilities

As the legal proceedings evolve, the spotlight is now on the potential commencement of the trial, scheduled for early June. The possibility of a plea agreement remains open, which could avert the trial.

The defense team, led by attorney Abbe Lowell, has expressed disappointment with the ruling. Lowell has hinted at possibly requesting the appeals court to reconsider the decision.

Further Constitutional Debates and Legal Proceedings

The ongoing legal challenges have not only involved the gun charges but also extended to allegations over Biden's tax affairs. In addition to the gun indictment, Hunter Biden faces a separate federal tax indictment in California, where he has also maintained his innocence.

The tax charges involve his earnings overseas, including dealings in China and Ukraine. For these charges, Biden has pleaded not guilty to all nine counts, illustrating the breadth of legal issues currently faced by him.

Contextual Background of the Legal Battle

The legal proceedings against Hunter Biden have been overseen by U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika, appointed by former President Donald Trump. Her rulings have significantly shaped the course of this high-profile case.

Judge Noreika last month refused to dismiss the gun indictment, a decision that has now been upheld by the appeals court, further solidifying the legal hurdles that Biden must overcome.

Public and Political Reactions to the Court's Decision

The case has attracted widespread media attention and public scrutiny, reflecting the complex intersection of legal rights, public safety, and high-profile personalities.

Comments from legal analysts suggest that the outcome of this trial could have broader implications for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly those involving gun possession and drug use.

In conclusion, the appeals court's decision to not dismiss the gun indictment against Hunter Biden marks a pivotal moment in this legal saga. With the trial set to begin in early June, unless a plea deal is reached, all eyes will be on how this case further develops and its potential impacts on future legal precedents.