Federal Judge Comments On Biden Decision
President Joe Biden’s decision to pardon his son Hunter Biden continues to draw intense scrutiny, with Trump-appointed Judge Mark C. Scarsi delivering a sharp critique in a recent court filing. Judge Scarsi, who oversaw Hunter Biden’s federal tax case in California, dismantled the president’s justification for the pardon, asserting that while the Constitution grants broad authority to pardon, it does not allow for a rewriting of historical facts.
In his statement, President Biden defended the pardon, claiming that any “reasonable” person examining the facts would conclude that Hunter was unfairly targeted due to his family connections. Scarsi rebuked this narrative, pointing out that two separate federal judges, as well as Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Justice Department, oversaw the investigations and charges. “In the President’s estimation,” Scarsi wrote, “this legion of federal civil servants, the undersigned included, are unreasonable people.”
U.S. district court judge takes issue with Biden’s claim in his pardon that no reasonable person looking at the case could reach any conclusion other than that Hunter was targeted because he is the POTUS’s son, noting that federal judges & Biden’s own DOJ rejected that argument. pic.twitter.com/vdxX9YDXyr
— Jerry Dunleavy IV 🇺🇸 (@JerryDunleavy) December 4, 2024
The judge further criticized Biden’s attempt to frame the situation as persecution, stating, “In short, a press release is not a pardon.” While acknowledging the president’s constitutional authority to issue pardons, Scarsi underscored that such power does not extend to revising the underlying facts of a case.
Hunter Biden’s federal tax charges stemmed from allegations that he failed to pay approximately $1.4 million in taxes and submitted falsified tax documents. Initially pleading guilty in September, Hunter had his sentencing scheduled for December 16. However, following the pardon, Judge Scarsi announced that while the sentencing hearing would be vacated, the case would remain open until the pardon is formally enacted.
The fallout from Biden’s decision has been swift and bipartisan. For months, the president and his staff categorically denied that a pardon was under consideration. This reversal has drawn criticism from political pundits and lawmakers across the aisle, with many accusing Biden of hypocrisy and undermining public trust in the justice system.
While the president contends that his son was targeted due to their familial ties, critics highlight the gravity of the charges and the involvement of his own Justice Department in the investigation. Judge Scarsi’s pointed remarks reflect broader concerns about the implications of this pardon, not only for the Biden administration but also for the perception of equal justice under the law.
This controversy adds fuel to an already contentious political climate. Biden’s decision to pardon Hunter comes as former President Donald Trump campaigns for a second term, vowing to restore accountability in federal institutions. Against this backdrop, the pardon has become a lightning rod for discussions about justice, fairness, and political privilege.