Hunter Biden was formally disbarred in Connecticut on Monday after a judge determined that he violated the state’s rules governing attorney conduct. The disbarment follows disciplinary complaints stemming from Biden’s federal gun and tax convictions, which were pardoned in December 2024 by his father, former President Joe Biden.
Court records show that Biden consented to the disbarment and acknowledged professional misconduct, without admitting to criminal wrongdoing.
Biden and his attorney, Ross Garber, appeared by video before Judge Trial Referee Patrick L. Carroll III during the proceeding in Waterbury, Newsweek reported.
“This marks the second jurisdiction in which Biden has lost his law license, following his voluntary decision to surrender his license to practice law in Washington, D.C., in April,” Newsweek noted. “The Connecticut disbarment effectively ends his legal career in multiple jurisdictions, demonstrating that professional consequences for attorneys persist even after criminal pardons.”
Biden was admitted to the Connecticut bar in 1997, one year after graduating from Yale Law School. His disbarment is a result of violations of several ethical rules for lawyers, which include engaging in conduct that involves dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, as noted in the judge’s findings.
Additionally, the judge referenced his disbarment in DC as partial grounds for his ruling, Newsweek added.
The disbarment stems from Hunter Biden’s underlying federal convictions, including three felony counts in a Delaware case in which he was found guilty of purchasing a firearm in 2018 while falsely stating on a federal form that he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs. He faced a potential sentence of up to 25 years in prison, though legal experts noted that, as a first-time offender, he likely would have received a significantly lighter sentence or avoided incarceration altogether.
Biden also faced federal charges in California related to his failure to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes. In September 2024, he agreed to plead guilty to a combination of misdemeanor and felony tax charges shortly before jury selection was set to begin.
Former President Joe Biden issued a broad pardon for his son in December 2024, covering conduct over an 11-year period.
Following the pardon, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika formally closed the Delaware gun case, though the conviction itself was not vacated.
The California tax case was also dismissed after the pardon was received, despite objections from prosecutors, who argued that the pardon should not erase the cases as though they had never occurred.
In Washington, D.C., Hunter Biden voluntarily surrendered his law license in April in light of his criminal record.
The District of Columbia Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility accepted the surrender, which avoided extended disciplinary proceedings over whether his prior criminal cases required mandatory disbarment.
The board recommended that the D.C. Court of Appeals approve Biden’s voluntary disbarment, Newsweek said.
In the Connecticut matter, Biden reached an agreement with the state agency responsible for attorney discipline. Under the agreement, he admitted to certain misconduct allegations outlined in court filings while contesting others, the outlet reported.
Paul Dorsey, one of the two people who filed the complaints in Connecticut about Hunter, told the judge, he: “Objected to the agreement because Hunter Biden did not admit to committing crimes.”
“With disbarment now in effect in Connecticut and voluntary surrender of his license in Washington, D.C., Biden’s ability to practice law has been permanently revoked in these jurisdictions,” the Associated Press added.
Hunter Biden sparked outrage last month after unleashing a vulgar personal attack on New York Post columnist Miranda Devine, calling her a “whore” and saying no one would mourn her death.
The remarks came during a November 6 appearance on the Wide Awake Podcast, where the former president’s son lashed out over Devine’s reporting on his infamous laptop and her years-long coverage of his overseas business dealings.
A Pentagon spokesperson said Monday that the Department of Defense is escalating a preliminary review into what it described as “serious allegations of misconduct” involving Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
The review stems from Kelly’s participation in a controversial video that reminded U.S. service members they have a duty to disobey orders they believe are “unlawful.” The Trump administration has criticized the video, arguing it risks undermining military discipline and the chain of command.
The Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel commenced the review to assess potential consequences for the retired naval captain. Currently, Kelly is subjected to “an official Command Investigation,” as stated by the spokesperson.
“The Office of the Secretary of War, in conjunction with the Department of War’s Office of the General Counsel, is escalating the preliminary review of Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.), to an official Command Investigation,” the Department of War official said in a statement sent to Breitbart News.
“Retired Captain Kelly is currently under investigation for serious allegations of misconduct. Further official comments will be limited to preserve the integrity of the proceedings,” the statement added.
Kelly, a former Navy pilot, now finds himself standing alone under scrutiny as the only member of what Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has aptly dubbed the “seditious six” who is currently under formal investigation. And that distinction isn’t exactly an honor.
Kelly wasn’t acting in isolation. He was joined in the now-infamous video by Democrat Reps. Chris Deluzio (PA-17), Chrissy Houlahan (PA-6), Maggie Goodlander (NH-2), and Jason Crow (CO-6), along with Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI).
Together, they participated in a reckless stunt urging members of the U.S. military and intelligence community to defy so-called “illegal orders” — a phrase deliberately vague enough to invite chaos, insubordination, and political weaponization of the armed forces.
That kind of rhetoric isn’t courageous. It’s dangerous. When elected officials with national platforms flirt with the idea of encouraging uniformed personnel to pick and choose which orders to follow based on partisan vibes, they’re not defending democracy — they’re undermining civilian control of the military, one of the most foundational principles of the republic.
A statement from the Department of War released last month indicated that Kelly’s possible “serious” misconduct is being reviewed for disciplinary action, which could range from a court-martial to other “administrative measures.”
An “official Command Investigation” represents an escalation that examines more grave or substantiated claims, providing it with enhanced authorities, such as the capacity to obtain sworn testimony.
Naturally, Kelly remained defiant, posting on X:
“It should send a shiver down the spine of every patriotic American that the president and secretary of defense would abuse their power to come after me or anyone this way,” he whined.
SECWAR Hegseth ripped Kelly and the other seditious lawmakers ahead of the review escalation. “As veterans of various sorts, the Seditious Six knew exactly what they were doing—sowing doubt through a politically-motivated influence operation,” he said. “The [Department of War] won’t fall for it or stand for it.”
Kelly and his ‘seditious’ associates aimed to engage in political maneuvers using the military. Now they’re discovering that this risky endeavor could lead to repercussions.