img

Hunter Biden seeks dismissal of all charges, claims senate-confirmed US Attorney David Weiss 'unconstitutionally appointed' as special counsel

The president's son was recently found guilty on felony gun charges, and is set to go on trial for tax charges in September.

ADVERTISEMENT

The president's son was recently found guilty on felony gun charges, and is set to go on trial for tax charges in September.

Image
Jarryd Jaeger Vancouver, BC
ADVERTISEMENT
On Thursday, Hunter Biden's lawyers Abbe Lowell and Bartholomew Dalton filed a motion in California federal court seeking to have his two criminal cases tossed, arguing that the special prosecutor, David Weiss, had been unconstitutionally appointed. The president's son was recently found guilty on felony gun charges, and is set to go on trial for tax charges in September.

The line of reasoning is similar to that in Trump's now-dismissed classified documents case, where his lawyers successfully argued that special prosecutor Jack Smith had been unconstitutionally appointed. However, as the New York Post points out, while Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland before being confirmed by Congress, Weiss had already gone through the process and was serving as US Attorney for Delaware when Garland tapped him to oversee Biden's case. It was the fact that Smith had yet to be confirmed that led Judge Aileen Cannon to rule the way she had.

"Mr. Biden brings this motion for lack of jurisdiction to challenge as unconstitutional the appointment and subsequent unlawful funding of these cases," Biden's lawyers wrote in their motion, per the Post and Axios. "Guided by Justice Thomas' opinion, Judge Cannon dismissed an indictment against President Trump earlier this week because the Special Counsel was unconstitutionally appointed. Based on these new legal developments, Mr. Biden moves to dismiss the indictment brought against him because the Special Counsel who initiated this prosecution was appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause as well."

In his concurring opinion during the Supreme Court's 6-3 immunity ruling, Thomas argued that, "by requiring that Congress create federal office 'by Law,' the Constitution imposes an important check against the President – he cannot create offices at his pleasure. If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution."


Weiss has not yet publicly responded to the filing.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign in to comment

Comments

Powered by The Post Millennial CMS™ Comments

Join and support independent free thinkers!

We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.

Support The Post Millennial

Remind me next month

To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 The Post Millennial, Privacy Policy | Do Not Sell My Personal Information