Hunter Biden was convicted of federal felony gun charges by a Delaware jury on Tuesday. Despite the guilty verdict, his attorneys have filed three motions for acquittal, which Judge Maryellen Norieka has yet to address. Defense lawyer Abbe Lowell expressed disappointment in the verdict and indicated that they would pursue all available legal challenges.
During the trial, Biden’s defense team questioned the government’s evidence of his crack cocaine use during his firearm purchase and possession in October 2018. Legal experts believe his appeal may focus on constitutional arguments, specifically under the Second and Sixth Amendments. The defense has argued that the charges violate Biden’s Second Amendment rights, a claim previously rejected but left open for renewal upon conviction.
The Second Amendment argument is based on the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, which set a new standard for evaluating gun laws. Biden’s legal team is also closely monitoring the Supreme Court case U.S. v. Rahimi, which could influence the constitutionality of the law under which Biden was charged. If Rahimi’s statute is upheld, Biden’s appeal could be more challenging.
If the Rahimi case results in the statute being struck down, it could bolster Biden’s Second Amendment argument. However, the Justice Department’s stance in the Rahimi case, favoring gun control measures, could complicate this strategy. Legal experts note that Rahimi’s outcome is crucial for Biden’s defense as it relates to firearm regulations.
Biden’s attorneys also raised a Sixth Amendment argument during the trial, claiming that excluding a second, allegedly altered version of his ATF firearms registration form violated his right to present a complete defense. Judge Norieka ruled the form irrelevant and inadmissible, stating that it could confuse the jury, which precluded the defense from discussing it during the trial.
This Sixth Amendment issue is preserved for potential appeal, but legal analysts believe it may not significantly impact the case. The focus remains on whether Biden falsely denied drug use on the original form, regardless of the second form’s inclusion. The defense’s argument hinges on procedural grounds rather than the substance of the charges.
Hunter Biden could face up to 25 years in prison and fines of $750,000 if his conviction is upheld, though as a first-time offender, he is unlikely to receive the maximum sentence. The upcoming legal maneuvers and the Supreme Court’s decision in Rahimi will play critical roles in determining the outcome of his appeal efforts.