Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Politics

Hunter Biden Has Some Very Personal Legal Problems

An Arkansas judge slapped down ex-stripper Lunden Roberts’ effort to make her child-support battle and paternity suit against First Son Hunter Biden a public affair. Hunter Biden contends that keeping the suit in the public eye only serves a detrimental political purpose to harm his family.

Hunter Biden Screenshot from Recent Media Interview.

An Arkansas judge slapped down ex-stripper Lunden Roberts’ effort to make her child-support battle and paternity suit against First Son Hunter Biden a public affair. Hunter Biden contends that keeping the suit in the public eye only serves a detrimental political purpose to harm his family.

Hunter Biden: The Latest 

Sixteenth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Holly Meyer granted Biden’s request on March 27 to impose a protective order on Roberts to ensure that all matters related to child support remain confidential. She ruled that “all information about or related to child support including affidavits of financial means is confidential information or confidential financial information and shall be sealed.”

Roberts attorney Clint Lancaster had filed a motion during a Feb. 22 hearing. He sought to unseal a Dec. 27 motion made by Hunter Biden attorney Brent Langdon and to gain clarification of an existing protective order.

 “The court has no concern for the political nature or aspects surrounding this case. This is a case about child support and the court has treated and will continue to treat these parties as any other members of this judicial district,” Meyer said in her protective order. 

Roberts’ motion to change their daughter Navy Joan’s surname to Biden was untouched by the order. Biden’s lawyers called this move “political warfare against the Defendant and his family.”

She made a Dec. 27 filing requesting changing her daughter’s name to Biden. His attorney Brent Langdon filed a rebuttal in December saying:

“The Plaintiff equivocates in her arguments depending on the motions or response filed on the same day by praising the Defendant and the Biden name to support the requested name change, and then disparaging Defendant and his family in others … In other filings on the same day as this motion, the Plaintiff takes the opportunity … to spew about the Defendant including his ‘ripe, and justified, public scrutiny resulting from his financial transactions’; the always good for public ridicule ‘Burisma’; and that he is the ‘subject of federal investigations’. And, of course, the Plaintiff takes the opportunity to take jabs at the sitting President of the United States … The child should have the opportunity for input at a time when the disparagement of the Biden name is not at its height.” 

Langdon continued: “The notoriety would no doubt rob this child of peaceful existence.”

She claimed that “one of the basic principles of a democracy is that the people have a right to know what is done in their courts.”

The current litigation is tied to Biden’s and Roberts’ battle over child support for their daughter.

Hunter Biden filed a motion in the court last September asking to modify the child-support payments he was ordered to pay by an Arkansas court in 2020, claiming a “substantial material change” in his financial circumstance. Roberts opposed the motion in a counter-filing in October.

Lancaster questioned the rationale at the time, vowing to depose Biden and to bring a forensic accountant with him to examine his finances. 

Judge Meyer’s order allowed Roberts to file a further motion about payments to Biden’s attorney, and the court would then schedule a hearing on that aspect of the case. 

A bench trial over the child-support case has been set for July 24-25. This will provide Roberts with an opportunity to delve into Biden’s finances.

MORE: Is AOC a Sellout? 

MORE: Hunter Biden Has a Big China Problem

MORE: Kamala Harris ‘Seems to Be An Albatross’

MORE: Pete Buttigieg: Running for President? 

MORE: What Trump Getting Arrested Could Look Like

John Rossomando was a senior analyst for Defense Policy and served as Senior Analyst for Counterterrorism at The Investigative Project on Terrorism for eight years. His work has been featured in numerous publications such as The American Thinker, Daily Wire, Red Alert Politics, CNSNews.com, The Daily Caller, Human Events, Newsmax, The American Spectator, TownHall.com, and Crisis Magazine. He also served as senior managing editor of The Bulletin, a 100,000-circulation daily newspaper in Philadelphia, and received the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors first-place award in 2008 for his reporting.

Written By

John Rossomando is a senior analyst for Defense Policy and served as Senior Analyst for Counterterrorism at The Investigative Project on Terrorism for eight years. His work has been featured in numerous publications such as The American Thinker, Daily Wire, Red Alert Politics, CNSNews.com, The Daily Caller, Human Events, Newsmax, The American Spectator, TownHall.com, and Crisis Magazine. He also served as senior managing editor of The Bulletin, a 100,000-circulation daily newspaper in Philadelphia, and received the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors first-place award in 2008 for his reporting.

Advertisement