The prosecution charges that Mr. Biden violated a rarely used statute that it claims prevented him from owning a firearm as an unlawful user of a controlled substance, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), but that statute’s status-based prohibition on gun ownership recently was struck down as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. See United States v. Daniels, 77 F.4th 337 (5th Cir. 2023). Not only does the unconstitutionality of Section 922(g)(3) render Mr. Biden’s alleged violation of that unconstitutional statute baseless, it compels the same conclusion as to the prosecution’s charges that Mr. Biden made a false statement in denying his status as a user of a controlled substance under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and caused the seller (a holder of a federal firearms license) to maintain a record of this false answer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A).

Because persons protected by the Second Amendment can no longer be denied gun ownership due simply to past drug use—a practice inconsistent with this nation’s historical tradition on firearm regulation—any false statement by Mr. Biden concerning his status as having used a controlled substance no longer concerns “any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale” of a firearm. … Quite simply, asking about Mr. Biden’s status as a user of a controlled status is constitutionally irrelevant to whether he can be denied his Second Amendment right to gun ownership. Likewise, Section 924(a)(1)(A)’s requirements concerning maintaining records free of false information is no longer implicated because it is not a statute that “criminalizes a false answer to an ultra vires question.” 

— Motion to dismiss charges in United States v. Biden

79 COMMENTS

  1. If drug users can no longer be barred from guns and this is to be the official stance of the US government then any and all references to is needs to be summarily removed from the 4473 form. Until that happens, then this is nothing more than bs.

    • That’s likely to be the outcome in the non-distant future, the only prohibited persons will be those convicted of physical violence against others.

      Since the Fascist left now claims simple speech is physical violence, things might get interesting… 🙁

        • Interesting article from revolver, thanks for sharing.

          But the fact is, the appellate court did not strike down the gag order, but rather affirmed it with some specific limitations.

          Meaning Trump and his attorneys lost their bid to have the gag order dismissed, that is what they call an ‘L’ in the business.

          The Supreme Court has ruled on this issue in the past, and found sometimes a person’s statements are not absolutely protected by the first amendment, many on this list are too young to have ever heard the term ‘fighting words’:

          “Fighting words are words meant to incite violence such that they may not be protected free speech under the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court first defined them in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (1942) as words which “by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.”

          In the decades following Chaplinsky, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided a number of cases which further clarify what speech or actions constitute fighting words.

          In Terminiello v. Chicago (1949), the Supreme Court narrowed the scope of what constitutes fighting words. The Court found that words which produce a clear and present danger are unprotected (and are considering fighting words), but words which invite dispute and even cause unrest are protected (and are not considered fighting words).

          In Feiner v. People of State of New York (1951), the Supreme Court held that akin to the fighting words doctrine, an incitement of a riot which creates a clear and present danger is also not protected by the First Amendment.“

          The pertinent part is that last paragraph:

          “ …an incitement of a riot which creates a clear and present danger is also not protected by the First Amendment.“

          “We’re going to march to the Capitol… …you’ve gotta fight like hell!”

          https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fighting_words

          Also, Jack Smith just filed notice of three more expert witnesses, who will discuss the ArcGIS cell phone data, including the WH cell phones content and movements.

          And trump’s espionage charges regarding the stolen national security documents are maturing, much interesting detail to be filed soon.

        • Which has fuckall with anything you jabbered about. Find someplace to be Miner preferably with a point.

        • Hey Minerva, you forgot something (as usual)…

          “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

        • miner you are priceless. Between you and dacian and hunter we have almost completely won. Over a million guns a month sold.

          And after I’ve told you this a number of times you still do not get it.

          Fascinating.

        • “peacefully and patriotically“

          Oh yes, the magical thinking that just because he sprinkled a few nice words within his message it somehow negates his ‘fighting words’.

          We’ll let the courts decide.

        • Your Honor, I offer up the preceding as Exhibit A in evidence that the defendant, Miner, is guilty of recieving payment -as shown by the number of letters expended – of accepting bribery and spreading gibberish in the furtherance of Communist ideals in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

        • Yes Minerva, let the courts decide… When the timeline of the actual violent group who were fired up by undercover FBI agents is overlaid with the timing of Trumps speech it will show that those people did not attend the speech and were actually already at the Capitol Building before he concluded his rally…

      • Speech is violence unless the speaker is calling for genocide of Jews, at least at Harvard and MIT.

    • The form itself is a violation of the constitution. Nobody needs to pass a background check or fill out a form to exercise a right. Period.

      • And yet many still do and will continue to be required to, because the ideology and those that support it are allowed. Liberal/Progressive Democrats will never stop in their attempts to Delay, Deny and De-legitimize, the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding citizens.

    • You’re absolutely correct, but the law was the law at the time. The national speed limit was a stupid law enacted for stupid reasons that didn’t work and was eventually repealed. That didn’t mean that you got all your ticket fines refunded. The 4473 asked a simple question and he answered with a lie. Maybe it’s a question that should no longer be asked, maybe he wouldn’t be prohibited today, but a lie is still a lie.

  2. hunter you pathetic little weasel…you should have left the 4473 question about drugs blank and hoped the FFL didn’t notice. Instead you answered the question with a lie therefore you own it lock, stock and barrel party boy.

    • Hunter Biden is a baptized and confirmed Catholic. He could have sworn off all drugs the night before. His dead brother’s widow could have dropped off all his drugs and paraphernalia inside garbage bag outside of a school. He could swing by confession the next morning and say a couple hail Marys on the way to the FFL then truthfully and in good Faith check the NO box on the drug user line while filling out his form 4473. Pathetic little weasel indeed.

      • I was a drinker and I quit every night. There has to be some substance to the “quit”. It is not like we accepted Jesus and have a spot in heaven, even though we are still sinners.

        • Unless you are a Catholic and confess on a regular basis. I know plenty of those Holier Than Thou types.

      • What the hell does being a Catholic have to do with it?

        Anyone can claim to have sworn off bad habits.

    • Let us not allow facts to stand in the way of a decision we need.

      We often say that we despise what some doushebag says, but we’ll defend his right to the speak his doushy mind. In this case, we need to defend the doushe’s right to bear arms. Yes, he’s a doushe, and he needs to be sitting behind bars. But I don’t mind using him to destroy his father’s agenda against guns. Thousands upon thousands of good men and women have been imprisoned by the ATF’s idiotic rules and interpretations of the constitution. We need that to stop!

        • Yes, douche is spelled with a “c” (not a “C”). Take ‘possum’s lead, and misspell words that might be censored, like gunms.

        • The “C” was for emphasis… Live with it and “GUN” does NOT get censored but SOSHULLIST spelled correctly does…

    • Video from Hunter’s laptop shows him in a messy hotel room and pans to his dope scale with 6 grams of coke on it. Probably used the video to lure dopehaid hos to his room for some nice snorts.

      • The Biden family is everything (corrupt, degenerate) they told us the Trump family was. Hunter couldn’t afford to pay his taxes because he blew $900k on prostitution and sex club membership (yes, really).

      • In FL less than 28 grams of cocaine is a third-degree felony, punishable by 5 years in prison or probation and/or a fine of $5,000, along with driver’s license revocation for up to two years.

        • If you’re in the can for 5 years, not having a driver’s license for 2 of those years is kinda irrelevant… 😉

  3. Wish that Biden’s lawyers would quit trying to justify his violations of federal law and give up their defense of this drughead. Then perhaps the feds can arrest “Daddy Joe” for HIS crimes against this country. Both need to be in jail.

    • Perhaps they do, however they should not be in jail for lieing on a 4473 form.
      I get it, Hunters a fuckhead and the Presidents(is he a president?) son.
      However that bias should not surface because the 4473 form is being used as a government privilege used against a Bill of Rights.
      I must have a Drivers License to legally drive a car on a public road.
      Privilege versus Rights

  4. OK, fine, let’s do this, but there’s one problem. Hunter broke the law before the change so he would still be charged and convicted because it was a violation of the law when he did it.

    I guess they didn’t think that through.

    • Depends if the issue is mooted before trial/conviction I guess, would need one of the lawyers to figure that one out.

      • You are correct. He has not yet been prosecuted to judgment, or a settlement entered as a judgment on the record, so if the law has been finally determined to be unconstitutional before that occurs, he cannot thereafter be prosecuted. I do not know that the federal court decision is final, i.e., may not be appealed further, at this point in time.

        • All it takes is an appeal to keep it in court. And it won’t be in force until all court proceedings are done, and usually there is a delay in the actual enforcement date.

    • You didn’t think it through, the law was repugnant to the Constitution, thus the law was invalid to begin with. As much as I detest Hunter Biden, this law violated the Constitution to begin with and the charges must be dropped.

    • Nope. As long as his attorneys properly raise the constitutional issue before conviction (which they have), he’s good. (People already convicted of a violation would have to show that they raised and did not waive the constitutional issue before conviction. If they raised it and it was denied (which it would have been until very recently), then they would have a pretty good argument on a habeas petition / writ of error corum nobis that their conviction were unconstitutional. But if they didn’t raise it, it would be deemed waived.)

      The key is that in Bruen, SCOTUS didn’t “change” the law, strictly speaking; it instead held “this is what the Constitution has always meant, properly construed.”

      Like Rahimi (and Ernesto Miranda), Hunter’s a scumbag. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t have constitutional rights. And the irony of FJB’s son arguing in favor of Bruen is rich.

      • I dunno having some gun right precedents named after the Bidens would be fitting especially when it would involve non violent felonies and drug use.

      • “And the irony of FJB’s son arguing in favor of Bruen is rich“

        Exactly, I am puzzled why more POTG are not running with this. No better poster boy than the president’s son…

        But unfortunately, their tribal nature and membership in the cult will not allow them to hold a reasonable position on the issue.

    • His lawyers are not challenging that he violated the law, as is currently written. His lawyers are challenging the law. If the law is deemed unconstitutional, then there can be no violation of said law.

      Try to keep up.

  5. I hope he wins.
    I hope the 4473 is picked apart and discarded.
    I hope “rarely used” cleans up the abundance of redundant, useless, selectively-enforced, malum prohibitum garbage on the books.

    I hope but I know even if he wins nothing will change for any of us peasants.

  6. He may have done a huge favor for the firearms community. Many a combat VET could make use of majik mushrooms to help with PTSD. They may not because they don’t want to lose their 2A rights.

  7. A Biden boy having a deleterious effect on anti-Second Amendment laws is a perfect culmination to Joetato’s presidency.

      • Jill is a dr. in the same sense that JesseJackson (t.m. The Church of Jackson) is a “Reverand”.
        And the quote was ” Don’t blame me for that dipshit.”

        • She has an Ed.D., not a PH.D. Big difference (i.e. PH. D. degrees require original research to advance the study of the subject area, and an oral defense of the thesis, whereas an Ed. D. merely requires an opinionated thesis paper).

          I know many PH. D’s in Education; all go by their first names even with their students. I know many Ed. D.’s, all want to be addressed as Doctor.

  8. I’m all for having Joe Biden’s son as the poster boy for 2A rights and being responsible for removing the any (definitely unconstitutional) firearm purchase clauses in the 4473. Too bad they didn’t catch him with an unregistered machine gun. That would be rich to have the son of a Democratic president dismantling the NFA as unconstitutional (which it is).

  9. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. There’s plenty of other stuff to nail him on, with sufficient prosecutorial will. I’d like to see this issue become turned into another brick in the wall that protects our 2A rights.

    • Why is no one going after Haley for tossing a firearm into a public trash receptacle, at the bare minimum it was wanton endangerment, carrying a firearm within 1000 feet of a school, theft of a firearm and improper transfer of a firearm…

  10. Going through life with impaired judgement is never a good idea, whether it’s dope or booze.
    Most human brains are not in need of any stimulants, people fool themselves.

  11. A definite case of a lot of people rubbing their hands together when that is the last thing that is called for.

  12. Simple resolution: is the trial about the violation(s) Hunter made, or is the trial about the laws as they currently stand?

    Judge should say: counselor, did your client violate the law(s)?

    End of trial: answer YES

    • If the law he violated was unconstitutional, then it is not enforceable.

      He is challenging the constitutionality of this law.

      So he can’t be convicted until the law is deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court.

  13. I look forward to the libertarians liberals and the left tearing themselves apart over this issue. Doing drugs and having sex with minors is ok??? If you do it in another country. Sex tourism.

    The gun grabbers and the drug legaliz@tion crowd are the same folks. This will be very entertaining.

  14. Argue that drug users are no longer prohibited persons and change the law, however it is and was at the time the law, therefore the moron broke the law… Not a moron for breaking the law, most people are in violation daily of some law, but they don’t offer up evidence in a book and videos on a laptop that they then drop off somewhere and forget about… THAT is a moron…

    • As mentioned above, if the law is deemed unconstitutional as his lawyers are suggesting (and there is a very good argument to suggest that it is unconstitutional), then the law is invalid, thus he didn’t “break the law”. There are plenty of other felonies that he can / should be charged with.

  15. red flag his butt, and send an armed ATF swat team to his home and threaten to shoot him and family if he doesn’t voluntarily comply like his dementia dad does to law abiding gun owners who didn’t lie on the 4473 and haven’t comitted any crimes.

  16. Well given that I want ALL gun laws struck down I support hunter getting off of that one. There’s more than enough credible evidence of the biden family’s corruption that they should sped the rest of their life in jail.

    Not that I’m expect for either of the bastards be actual held account for their crimes, given that the USA has officially devolved into an open banana republic. But that’s the way it should be.

  17. A lame attempt. Hunter Biden broke federal law. Lying on the form. As did many others who are in jail as we speak.

  18. Even if that’s the case and that goes into law it’s still illegal and a federal offense to lie on a 4473, catch 22.😁😁

    • Except that the “false statement” charge requires there to have been a *material* false statement to be a crime. E.g., if you transpose the digits on your phone number or home address on a 4473, it’s literally a false statement but almost certainly not a material one.

      The argument will be that regardless of what answer Crackhead put on the form, the government could not constitutionally use that answer to deny him the ability to acquire the weapon. Ergo, whatever answer he gave to the question (true or false) was immaterial, and thus can’t be the basis for a false statement charge.

      And that argument will very likely prevail.

      • if you transpose the digits on your phone number or home address on a 4473, it’s literally a false statement but almost certainly not a material one.

        Yet FFLs are being shut down for exactly that type of error…

        • “Yet FFLs are being shut down for exactly that type of error…”

          They lack the financial resources to fight it, therefore, they fold, and close… 🙁

  19. Deja Taylor, mother of the kid that shot the teacher in Virginia, recently got 21 months for user with a gun. Wonder how DOJ is feeling with Hunter.

  20. I don’t understand why there is any controversy.
    Yamhill County Judge Ladd Wiles rules that an unlicensed, marijuana bootlegger is perfectly within their rights to shoot at their landlord’s children in retaliation for efforts to evict. Of course just as Alec Baldwin can’t understand that a revolver that is being used as a prop to film his movie, Judge Wiles is to abysmally stupid to understand that a 12 gauge shotgun is a deadly weapon. Judge Wiles also has a profound conflict of interest because his famously philandering, perjuring, drug addicted wife, Amanda S Marshall, former US Attorney for the State of Oregon, transitioned from seldom prosecuting Oregon Marijuana traffickers to actually representing them in her private practice. Unfortunately; Yamhill County Judge Cynthia Easterday accepted the argument that the same marijuana bootlegger isn’t a threat because he only loads his shotgun with buckshot when he shoots at people.

  21. Hunter needs to study the Seth Rich case.. if he keeps insisting on being a public relations disaster, for the Democratic Party..well,they might make an example out of him… no one is immune when it comes to getting in the way of Democrat power…

Comments are closed.