In a rare public rebuke, US District Judge Mark Scarsi, who presided over Hunter Biden’s federal tax case, criticized President Joe Biden’s recent decision to pardon his son. The judge, who former President Trump nominated, argued that the president misrepresented the facts of the case and suggested that the pardon could be unconstitutional.
On Tuesday, Judge Scarsi questioned the president’s claim of unequal treatment, particularly about Hunter Biden’s tax evasion charges. Hunter had pleaded guilty to tax evasion for misclassifying personal expenses, including luxury clothing and escort services, but he was already sober at the time the offenses took place. Scarsi said the president’s claim that Hunter was being treated unfairly because he was an addict did not hold water because the tax crimes were committed after he was sober.
The judge also expressed concern with the pardon’s scope, as it covers offenses committed during 11 years, and questioned whether pardons can apply prospectively to events not yet occurred. Scarsi emphasized that while the president has broad authority in granting pardons, the Constitution does not allow history to be rewritten.
This comes on the heels of bipartisan criticism of the pardon decision by President Biden and after two federal judges rejected claims of bias in the case. Controversy aside, attorneys for Hunter Biden filed the signed pardon this week, although the judge noted the document had not been authenticated.
She then ruled to vacate the sentencing hearing for Hunter Biden set for December 16, and terminate the case once the pardon is formally recognized.
