Judge voids new charge against ex-FBI officials in Hunter Biden laptop case

A federal judge on Tuesday voided a new obstruction charge against two former FBI officials who are accused of lying to Congress about their knowledge of a laptop linked to Hunter Biden. U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui struck the amended criminal complaint from the record after concluding the Justice Department filed it improperly. The document added the new charge against Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, but it went straight to the court docket without the required judicial sign-off confirming probable cause.

Faruqui described the filing as "inappropriate" given the presumption of innocence for defendants. He noted that criminal complaints are typically reserved for situations involving active crimes or immediate dangers to society, not for former officials already in custody or under investigation. The judge stated he had never before seen a prosecutor file an unsigned criminal complaint, calling the overall situation a "sideshow on top of a sideshow." He asked the prosecutors why they were changing the history of how they charge cases in this specific instance.

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Borchert defended the move, arguing that court rules allowed the filing because the government was not seeking to arrest the former officials. Faruqi rejected that argument, stating it was not the court's practice to accept unsigned complaints. He questioned why the United States was reticent to submit a probable cause determination that prosecutors believed was righteous. Mary Dohrmann, an attorney for Floris, called the lack of sign-off inexcusable, attributing it to "incompetence, recklessness or cruelty." She described the missing approval as the "elephant in the room" and suggested evidence was mounting that the prosecution served as a "political football."

The underlying case, announced Friday, accuses Floris and Benavides of falsely minimizing their knowledge of the laptop during 2023 congressional interviews. The Justice Department says the two officials claimed to have no independent insight into the FBI's recovery of the device, which belonged to Hunter Biden. Prosecutors argue that the laptop was abandoned at a computer repair shop in 2019. In reality, the complaint states, Floris and Benavides participated in numerous discussions about the laptop while leading the FBI Foreign Influence Task Force. The government contends their statements misled the congressional investigation into Biden family business dealings.

Ronald Safer, a lawyer for Benavides, challenged the prosecution's timeline during the hearing. He questioned an FBI agent about whether his client actually remembered the correct answers to questions asked in September 2023. Safer argued that Benavides was asked about events from several years earlier, casting doubt on whether his statements were intentionally false. The task force that Floris and Benavides led was established in the first Trump administration to monitor foreign influence campaigns. It was disbanded in February 2025 by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi.

The case revisits the controversy surrounding the laptop's discovery, which emerged in the final weeks of the 2020 presidential race. The New York Post reported the device had been dropped off by Hunter Biden at a Delaware repair shop. The paper obtained a hard drive from Rudy Giuliani, a close ally of President Donald Trump. Democrats and former intelligence officials raised concerns about possible Russian involvement, especially after the Trump administration's intelligence community assessed that Moscow was trying to undermine Joe Biden's candidacy. Then-national intelligence director John Ratcliffe stated there were no signs of Russian actors involved. The FBI later investigated Hunter Biden on gun and tax charges that resulted in felony convictions. Joe Biden pardoned his son in late 2024.

The preliminary hearing continued on Tuesday after the judge's ruling on the amended complaint. The former officials' lawyers have denied any allegations of wrongdoing. The case is one of several high-profile Justice Department actions occurring before next week's midterm elections.