A federal judge in Delaware refused Friday to dismiss a federal gun case against Hunter Biden. The judge, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika, rejected Hunter Biden's claim that the prosecution is politically motivated and other arguments.
Judge Noreika denied defense efforts to stop the prosecution of Hunter Biden for allegedly lying about his drug use in October 2018 on a form to purchase a gun that he possessed for approximately 11 days.
Hunter Biden's legal team contended that the case was driven by political reasons and maintained that an immunity provision from an initial plea deal that collapsed should still apply. They also disputed the appointment of special counsel David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware, to oversee the case.
The trial for this case is tentatively set to commence in early June.
Judge Noreika, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, has not made a decision yet on the challenge regarding the constitutionality of the gun charges.
Hunter Biden is facing allegations of failing to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes over three years in Los Angeles, as he lived an "extravagant lifestyle" while struggling with drug addiction. The charges, which were not dismissed by the overseeing judge, are separate from another case where Biden has pleaded not guilty.
Biden's legal team has stated that he did not break the law, despite acknowledging his addiction issues. They argue that he is being unfairly targeted for political reasons and that the charges are selective and unjust.
In a recent ruling, the judge stated that there was no concrete evidence to support claims that external influences affected the decision to indict Biden. The judge dismissed speculations of political pressure from Congressional Republicans impacting the case, labeling it as mere speculation.
The ruling highlighted that while there may have been pressure from lawmakers during the decision-making process, there was no credible evidence to suggest that it influenced the outcome. The judge emphasized the importance of concrete proof rather than speculation in legal proceedings.
