Hunter Biden’s legal troubles have become a national soap opera, but the latest episode features an unexpected twist: a federal judge calling out President Joe Biden for his audacious—and apparently factually shaky—pardon of his son. Judge Mark C. Scarsi didn’t just slap the wrist of the president and his son; he penned a five-page ruling that systematically dismantled the administration’s claims and exposed the pardon for what it was: a blatant act of political favoritism.
Let’s start with the obvious. President Biden justified the pardon by claiming Hunter was treated unfairly due to his addiction issues and his last name. But Judge Scarsi wasn’t buying it. In his scathing ruling, the judge pointed out that Hunter admitted to engaging in tax evasion after his period of addiction. Translation: Hunter wasn’t some poor, recovering addict who got a raw deal. He was a guy dodging taxes while claiming the moral high ground. And for Joe Biden to suggest otherwise? The judge called it “false and offensive.”
“The President asserts that Mr. Biden ‘was treated differently’ from others ‘who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions,’ implying that Mr. Biden was among those individuals who untimely paid taxes due to addiction. But he is not… Mr. Biden admitted that he engaged in tax evasion after this period of addiction,” the judge wrote.
The ruling also zeroed in on Biden’s claim that “no reasonable person” could conclude Hunter was treated fairly. Judge Scarsi highlighted that two federal judges had already dismissed Hunter’s cries of bias, and even Biden’s own Department of Justice oversaw the investigation. Are we really to believe that Biden’s own appointees and a team of federal judges were all in on some grand conspiracy against his son? If that’s the case, Biden must think “reasonable” people are in short supply—especially in his administration.
“According to the President, ‘[n]o reasonable person who looks at the facts of [Mr. Biden’s] cases can reach any other conclusion than [Mr. Biden] was singled out only because he is [the President’s] son.’ But two federal judges expressly rejected Mr. Biden’s arguments that the Government prosecuted Mr. Biden because of his familial relation to the President,” he wrote. “And the President’s own Attorney General and Department of Justice personnel oversaw the investigation leading to the charges. In the President’s estimation, this legion of federal civil servants, the undersigned included, are unreasonable people.”
But the cherry on top of this judicial beatdown was the judge’s critique of Hunter’s legal tactics. When Hunter filed a motion to dismiss the indictment based on his pardon, he didn’t bother attaching the actual pardon to the motion. Instead, he linked to a White House press release. Judge Scarsi’s response? “A press release is not a pardon.” Ouch.
Adding to the absurdity is the overly broad scope of the pardon itself. It covered Hunter’s actions from 2014 right up to December 1, the day Joe Biden signed it. The judge even noted the bizarre implication that this pardon might technically include crimes Hunter committed later that same day. While the judge generously avoided delving into potential constitutional issues, he didn’t hide his skepticism.
Wow. This is a total and brutal slapdown of Joe Biden by Judge Scarsi: “The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to… https://t.co/H426NOtels
— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) December 4, 2024
Special Prosecutor David Weiss, the man tasked with cleaning up this legal circus, also weighed in, reminding everyone that a pardon is an act of mercy, not a magic wand to erase guilt. He pointed out that Hunter’s case had been meticulously reviewed by 10 judges across six administrations, all of whom found nothing improper about his indictment. Weiss even drew a comparison to Donald Trump’s controversial pardon of Steve Bannon, noting that the Biden DOJ fought tooth and nail to avoid giving Bannon any additional legal relief. Apparently, what’s good for the goose is not good for the Hunter.
Let’s not forget Joe Biden’s repeated public promises that he wouldn’t pardon his son. If you believed that, Judge Scarsi’s ruling probably felt like a bucket of cold water. Actions speak louder than words, and this action speaks volumes about the Biden family’s priorities. Accountability? Justice? Transparency? Not so much.
The whole debacle underscores a larger issue: when elites bend the rules, the system’s credibility takes a hit. Americans are watching, and they’re asking a simple question: if Hunter Biden gets a free pass, what does that mean for the rest of us?
