Imagine a White House strategy call on a monumental Supreme Court ruling, only to hear an unexpected voice chime in with bold advice—turns out, it’s Hunter Biden, the president’s son, stirring the pot.
Fox News reported that a new book, "2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America," unveils a tense moment when Hunter Biden joined a critical video discussion about a Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, prompting a top advisor to call his participation "inappropriate."
This eyebrow-raising incident, detailed in a book released on a Tuesday in 2024, centers on a Supreme Court ruling from July 1, 2024, in Trump v. United States.
By a 6-3 margin, the court declared that former presidents enjoy significant immunity from prosecution for official acts, a decision stemming from charges against Donald Trump tied to the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot and election interference allegations.
Trump, having pleaded not guilty, argued that prosecution shouldn’t proceed without a House impeachment and Senate conviction—a stance now partially validated by the court.
In response to this landmark ruling, White House chief of staff Jeff Zients organized a video call with key figures like counsel Ed Siskel, communications director Ben LaBolt, and senior advisor Mike Donilon to craft a statement.
President Joe Biden, eager to address the nation directly, pushed for an on-camera response despite a written draft already prepared by Donilon.
Then, out of nowhere, a mystery voice suggested an Oval Office address—soon revealed to be Hunter Biden, whose presence caught some staffers completely off guard.
As quoted in the book, Hunter insisted, "This is one of the most consequential decisions," arguing his father deserved the gravitas of the Oval Office backdrop to make his point.
While that idea didn’t stick, Biden ultimately spoke from the Cross Hall, a White House hallway, on July 1, 2024—Hunter’s input reportedly shaped the decision to avoid press questions after the brief speech.
Ed Siskel, the White House counsel, wasn’t thrilled, voicing concerns during the call about the optics of using the Oval Office and later confiding to colleagues that Hunter’s involvement felt out of line.
According to co-author Josh Dawsey, speaking on ABC's "This Week," Hunter’s role wasn’t a one-off, as he often joined such calls and influenced campaign choices, weighing heavily on his father’s mind.
That constant presence, as Dawsey suggests, became a persistent burden for Biden during his presidency, a distraction from the larger issues at hand like responding to judicial bombshells.
While Siskel and Biden’s team stayed silent when approached by Fox News Digital for comment, the story paints a picture of a White House wrestling with internal dynamics as much as external challenges.
From a conservative vantage point, this episode raises valid questions about boundaries—should family members, especially those with their public controversies, be steering presidential strategy on matters of national weight?
It’s not about personal grudges but about accountability; when advisors like Siskel flag “inappropriate” involvement, it signals a breach of the professionalism Americans expect from their executive branch.
The Supreme Court ruling itself already stirred debate over executive power—add Hunter’s unsolicited input, and it’s a recipe for distrust in how decisions are made behind closed doors.
Authored by Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager, and Isaac Arnsdorf, the book "2024" isn’t just a gossip mill—it’s a window into a presidency grappling with optics, family ties, and seismic legal shifts.
Pair this with Fox News Digital’s ongoing coverage of Biden’s inner circle and reported cognitive concerns, and you’ve got a narrative of a White House under scrutiny from all angles.