Well gang, the Delaware District Court got it wrong again. This time with the denial of Hunter Biden's challenge to the charge for possessing a firearm as an unlawful user of controlled substances. As you may recall, last year, the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals decided the case of United States v. Daniels which held 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(3) unconstitutional as applied. Section 922(g)(3) is the one that says a person may not possess a firearm if they are an unlawful user of controlled substances. In that case, the defendant was stopped for a minor traffic violation and was found to be in possession of a de minimis quantity of marijuana, a pistol, and a rifle. He was convicted under Section 922(g)(3) and later appealed to the Fifth Circuit which reversed and vacated the conviction as Section 922(g)(3) was unconstitutional as applied. In the Biden case, the attorney got a bit too ambitious and argued that Section 922(g)(3) is facially unconstitutional, and by using rather lazy analogical analysis under Heller and Bruen, the presiding Delaware District Court judge denied the motion without prejudice. While this is a bit of a set back, it left the door open for an as applied challenge at the close of the Government's case in chief. Stay tuned for more. If anyone wants to look over the opinion, I can link it here in a reply.
