Hunter Biden is in hot water and, considering his father’s position on gun control, it’s a little weird that it’s for breaking gun control laws.

Then again, when you’re talking about the last remaining Biden son, that really shouldn’t be that shocking.

Yet many people are arguing that Hunter may well benefit from the very part of the Constitution his father has spent so many years trying to undermine: The Second Amendment.

They’re not saying it without at least some basis, either, as Cam noted on Tuesday.

But things are never that simple.

Hunter Biden’s arraignment Tuesday morning in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware occurred less than a week after the House Oversight and Accountability Committee held its first hearing in an impeachment inquiry targeting the president over evidence of influence peddling by Biden family members.

If convicted on the gun charges, the younger Biden faces a maximum of 25 years in prison, but that appears unlikely.

The indictment accuses Hunter Biden of making a false statement on a gun-purchase form to a federally licensed firearms dealer when he denied his own drug use. The indictment also charges Hunter with unlawful possession of a firearm because of that drug use.

The younger Biden’s legal team is expected to challenge the constitutionality of the charge, and that might have legal merit, according to Paul Kamenar, counsel for the National Legal and Policy Center, a watchdog group.

Kamenar noted that a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed the conviction of a man for possessing a gun when using a controlled substance—in that case, marijuana.

However, Biden still could be in trouble for lying on a federal form, he said.

Honestly, I’m fine with overturning the prohibition on gun ownership for those who use controlled substances. I also happen to think that using the text and history standard laid down in Bruen, those laws actually are unconstitutional. There’s an analog for laws against using a gun while under the influence, but that’s a different matter entirely than a blanket prohibition on general use.

But Hunter allegedly lied on his 4473, and that’s a different issue.

When you buy a gun, you sign that the information is correct. You do so with the understanding you could face charges if you’re lying. Hunter had to know this and signed anyway.

As such, while he might get the lifeline on the issue of owning a gun while using an illicit substance, no one should bank on that being enough to save him from criminal penalties.

Not from a Second Amendment perspective, at least.

Look, it’s not that I want to see Hunter punished simply because he’s Hunter. I don’t care enough about him as an individual to have that kind of outlook.

What my issue has been and will remain is that he got a pass because he’s a Biden. We’re supposed to have equal protection under the law, not a tier for the elite and a tier for the rest of us. Him facing the same charges the rest of us would face–and that, contrary to the leftist media’s claims, a significant number of people have been charged for violating–is only right.

If it also happens to result in bad law being thrown out, well, I’ll still take that win.

But I’m not convinced that it’ll be enough to save the younger Biden.