A federal judge has threatened sanctions against Hunter Biden’s lawyers for making “false statements” in a motion to dismiss criminal charges against him in California.
U.S. District Judge Mark Scarci issued an order on Wednesday calling on Hunter Biden’s legal team to “show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for the false statements made in their complaint.” Judge Scarci wrote that Biden’s legal team falsely claimed that U.S. Attorney David Weiss did not prosecute the president’s son until he was appointed special counsel.
“However, these statements are untrue, and Mr. Biden’s lawyers know they are untrue,” Scarci wrote.
Biden’s lawyers filed a motion last week asking the judge to dismiss the case. His criminal charges He is set to go on trial this fall in California on charges of filing false tax returns and tax evasion. The defendants also have filed a motion asking a Delaware judge to dismiss the criminal charges against him in a federal firearms case in which he was convicted last month.
In both motions, the defense cited a recent decision by U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon, who dismissed a Florida lawsuit against former President Trump over classified documents, ruling that special counsel Jack Smith was not lawfully appointed. Judge Cannon said selecting him as special counsel “effectively usurps” Congress’ constitutional role in the appointment process.
Biden’s team has sought to dismiss the charges against Biden because of that decision, writing that as a federal prosecutor, Weiss “had years to bring charges he deemed just, but did not do so until he obtained the special counsel title he sought.”
In his order, Judge Scarci wrote that Weiss filed the original charges against Biden as a federal prosecutor and before he was appointed special counsel. Biden was expected to plead guilty, but after a plea deal fell apart last year, Weiss began prosecuting Biden and preparing for trial.
“The false statements in the present complaint are not trivial, and Weiss’s filing of charges against Biden in her capacity as a federal prosecutor creates a meaningful difference between this case and the non-binding district court ruling on which Biden bases his complaint,” Scarci wrote.
“But Biden’s motion does not address this distinction. Rather, counsel avoids the issue by misrepresenting the history of the litigation,” he continued, adding that courts “have little tolerance for counsel’s lack of candor.”
Scalci said Biden’s team has seven days to respond to the order, and that “failure to provide a timely and satisfactory response will result in sanctions.”
The Hill has reached out to Biden’s lawyers for comment.
