A federal judge has publicly rebuked President Joe Biden for pardoning his son, Hunter Biden, this week, accusing the president of misrepresenting the facts surrounding the criminal case.
U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi, who presided over Hunter Biden’s federal tax case in Los Angeles, condemned the move.
The pardon, announced Sunday, was described by President Biden as “full and unconditional,” absolving Hunter Biden of all federal offenses over an 11-year period. It also nullified a Delaware jury’s conviction of Hunter Biden for illegally purchasing a handgun. This decision, according to Judge Scarsi, not only mischaracterized the case but also undermined the integrity of the justice system.
In his order, Scarsi, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, questioned the rationale behind the pardon.
He criticized Biden’s claim that his son was the victim of unequal treatment due to his family name. He said the president’s assertion that Hunter Biden was unfairly singled out compared to others with tax issues, particularly those struggling with addiction.
“The President asserts that Mr. Biden ‘was treated differently’ from others ‘who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions,'” Scarsi wrote.
However, he pointed out that Hunter Biden’s tax evasion occurred after he had become sober. The judge elaborated that Hunter Biden had intentionally misclassified personal expenses—ranging from luxury clothing and escort services to his daughter’s tuition—as business deductions.
Scarsi also criticized President Biden’s claim that no “reasonable person” could view the charges as anything other than politically motivated. The judge countered this argument, stating, “Two federal judges expressly rejected Mr. Biden’s arguments that the Government prosecuted Mr. Biden because of his familial relation to the president.”
Scarsi said that the investigation and subsequent charges were overseen by Attorney General Merrick Garland and Department of Justice officials appointed by President Biden himself.
He suggested that the president’s remarks implied that a vast number of federal civil servants, including himself, were acting unreasonably.
“In the President’s estimation, this legion of federal civil servants, the undersigned included, are unreasonable people,” Scarsi wrote, alluding to the implication that the justice system acted unfairly or with bias.
