Hunter Biden (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite), special counsel David Weiss (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Lawyers for Hunter Biden in his Delaware-based federal gun case accused special counsel David Weiss of lodging an “unlawful and illogical” request to continue pushing toward trial as the defense appeals the judge’s refusal to toss out the indictment.
In the brief reply on Wednesday, attorneys for President Joe Biden’s son insisted that U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika cannot simply “plow ahead in scheduling a trial” while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit handles the defendant’s interlocutory appeal.
As Law&Crime reported one day ago, Hunter Biden intends to raise the same arguments Noreika rejected before an appellate panel. Biden has claimed that his torpedoed plea and diversion agreement “conferred” him with immunity from prosecution and that his indictment violated the separation of powers. He has also argued unsuccessfully that Weiss was unlawfully appointed by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and unlawfully funded, arguments that Donald Trump’s defense has embraced in the Mar-a-Lago case.
Notably, the defense and prosecution butted heads over the appellate efforts and its potential impact on the penciled in June 3 trial date, with Weiss warning that Biden’s defense “could jeopardize the schedule and trial date in this matter.”
In an ensuing defense reply supporting its own status report, the Biden team said that the interlocutory appeal has necessarily divested Noreika of jurisdiction on the issues she rejected, making Weiss’ complaint “unlawful and illogical.”
“The Special Counsel’s suggestion that this Court plow ahead in scheduling a trial while this case is on appeal is both unlawful and illogical,” the filing said. “This Court has been divested of jurisdiction, so it cannot proceed.”
The defense said it would be “improper” for the judge to cater to Weiss’ scheduling priorities and “illogical” for the special counsel to insist on cementing a trial schedule at this stage.
“As the Special Counsel noted, the Third Circuit has requested briefing on the jurisdictional question in the next two weeks, so it would be improper for this Court to wade into the issue of the Third Circuit’s jurisdiction over the appeal at the same time the Third Circuit is considering that issue for itself,” the reply continued. “Moreover, it is illogical for the Special Counsel to ask this Court to set a trial schedule when it is uncertain whether or when jurisdiction may return to this Court. Once the appeal has been resolved, the Court and the parties will then be in the best position to determine the appropriate next steps.”
The defense asked the judge to hold “a brief status conference” geared towards “further clarity regarding a scheduling order in this matter.”
On April 11, Noreika ordered the parties to submit a revised proposed schedule by April 18. Biden’s interlocutory appeal notice and related status report were filed one day before the deadline — without a proposed schedule. Weiss, for his part, said the status report “does not comply” with the judge’s April 11 order, so he urged Noreika to accept the prosecution’s proposed schedule and to reject the defense’s call for a status conference amid their last-minute appellate maneuvering.
“The government believes that the Court’s Order is clear and a second status conference to discuss scheduling is not necessary. Since the defendant failed to propose any dates, the government requests that the Court adopt the proposed schedule submitted by the government,” the special counsel said in reply to Biden.
Read the Hunter Biden reply here.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow Law&Crime:
