Federal judge criticizes President Biden's pardon, says it misrepresents son's criminal case.

The judge who presided over Hunter Biden's tax case in Los Angeles criticized President Biden on Tuesday for pardoning his son this week, saying he misrepresented his son's case when he announced the move.

In a brief letter, US District Judge Mark Scarsi accused Hunter Biden's lawyers of failing to include a copy of the pardon signed by President Biden and also challenged the president's interpretation of the pardon, saying it undermined federal law and the justice system.

The president's outspoken criticism of the sitting federal judge added to the condemnation of Republicans and Democrats over the president's surprise decision on Sunday to pardon his son for any crimes 11 years after he repeatedly said he would not.

On Tuesday, Gov. Gavin Newsom also spoke badly of the president for breaking his promise not to pardon his son.

Scarsi, who was appointed to the federal bench by then-President Trump, disputed the claim of unequal, biased treatment that the president sought to spare his son from prison in a tax case. The pardon also overturned a Delaware judge's decision that convicted Hunter Biden of illegally buying a handgun.

“The President asserts that Mr. Biden was 'treated differently' from others who were 'delayed to pay taxes due to a severe addiction,'” Scarsi wrote. personal expenses – such as luxury clothing, escort services and her daughter's education – as business expenses.

Scarsi also questioned President Biden's assertion that no “reasonable person” would reach “any other conclusion” than that Hunter Biden was nominated because of his last name.

“But two federal judges rejected Mr. Biden's arguments that the government prosecuted Mr. Biden because of his family ties to the president,” Scarsi wrote. “With the Attorney General of the President and the staff of the Department of Justice overseeing the investigation that leads to the charges.

“In the estimation of the President, this group of public servants, including the undersigned, are irrational,” the judge wrote.

Scarsi noted that President Biden “has broad authority to grant pardons and amnesty for crimes against the United States … but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history.”

In his decision, Scarsi said he will withdraw Hunter Biden's case, scheduled for December 16, but will not end the case until the amnesty signed by President Biden is officially delivered.

Attorneys for Hunter Biden did not respond to a request for comment.

Separately, the judge questioned the amnesty clause, noting that it included conduct on “December 1” but was signed on the same day.

“The warrant may be read to apply to conduct not yet committed at the time of its execution, which exceeds the scope of the pardon power,” Scarsi wrote. Scarsi said he was choosing to understand that the pardon included conduct “at the time of the execution” on Sunday.