House Republicans on the Judiciary and Oversight Committees said Sunday that they will issue new subpoenas for President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden after his lawyer said he would comply with a congressional subpoena if the lawmakers issue a “new proper” one.
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, indicated that new subpoenas to Hunter Biden would be issued in the coming weeks in a letter to Hunter Biden’s lawyer Abbe Lowell on Sunday.
Comer and Jordan maintained that their initial subpoenas requesting his deposition behind closed doors are “lawful and legally enforceable” and again criticized his defiance of the subpoenas. Hunter Biden’s legal team had asserted that their client would only testify in a public setting. On the day he was scheduled to appear for a closed-door deposition last month, Hunter Biden instead delivered public remarks in front of the Capitol, taking no questions.
The GOP-led committees voted last week to formally recommend that the full House hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena in their impeachment inquiry into his father. Hours before the the contempt resolutions passed along party lines, the president’s son made a brief surprise appearance during the Oversight Committee’s markup.
After Republicans voted to recommend Hunter Biden be held in contempt, his attorney said in a letter to Comer and Jordan on Friday that he would comply with a congressional subpoena under the condition that it’s a “new proper” one.
“If you issue a new proper subpoena, now that there is a duly authorized impeachment inquiry, Mr. Biden will comply for a hearing or deposition. We will accept such a subpoena on Mr. Biden’s behalf,” Lowell wrote.
Lowell said the subpoenas were “legally invalid” because they were issued prior to the House’s vote last month to authorize the impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden.
In their letter Sunday, Comer and Jordan wrote that Lowell’s assertion that their subpoenas are “somehow legally invalid” was “inaccurate and unpersuasive.”
They said their committees have “more than adequately explained the legislative purpose” to support their subpoenas to the president’s son and argued there is “no legal basis” for him to defy them.
“His conduct toward the House has been contemptuous. His defiance of the subpoenas has been willful and flagrant,” Comer and Jordan wrote. “His demands to testify only in a public setting are, as we have explained, inconsistent with the practice of these Committees in this matter as well as the practice of congressional Committees in recent Congresses. While we welcome Mr. Biden’s public testimony at the appropriate time, he must appear for a deposition that conforms to the House Rules and the rules and practices of the Committees, just like every other witness before the Committees.”
“The Committees welcome Mr. Biden’s newfound willingness to testify in a deposition setting under subpoena,” they added. “Although the Committee’s subpoenas are lawful and remain legally enforceable, as an accommodation to Mr. Biden and at your request, we are prepared to issue subpoenas compelling Mr. Biden’s appearance at a deposition on a new date in the coming weeks.”
Hunter Biden and House Republicans have been engaged in a monthslong showdown over his cooperation in Republicans’ wide-ranging impeachment inquiry into the president. Comer and Jordan have alleged the involvement of president’s son in foreign business dealings associated with his father, but Republicans have not shown direct evidence to back up their claims that the president personally benefited from his son’s business dealings.
The House this week is scheduled to vote to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with the congressional subpoenas. In a post to X on Friday, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., wrote, “Next week the House will vote to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for repeatedly defying subpoenas. Enough of his stunts. He doesn’t get to play by a different set of rules. He’s not above the law.”
