Pop Art: The Value of Hunter Biden’s Art Expected to Collapse With the End of his Father’s Influence

We have previously discussed the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s art sales. Many viewed the art as another avenue for political allies to funnel money to the Bidens. That was reinforced when it was discovered that the lucrative sales heralded by Hunter’s allies were found to have been largely the results of purchases by his “sugar bro” Kevin Morris. Now, experts say that whatever value is left in Hunter’s art will likely collapse with his father’s departure — the clearest indicator of the actual value of the art for “investors.” Hunter’s art appears to be moving from an impressionistic to a harsh realism period.

Georges Bergès, Hunter Biden’s art gallerist, contradicted claims of the White House on the handling of the art. Hunter reportedly knew who purchased roughly 70% of the value of his art, including Democrat donors Morris and Elizabeth Hirsh Naftali.

While Biden allies hyped the sales to show that Hunter was a legitimate artist, Bergès admitted that Morris actually purchased most of the art. Morris has reportedly given Hunter millions to cover unpaid taxes and expenses. Hunter only sold paintings to ten people for $1.5 million, according to congressional testimony from 2024. Morris bought 11 works for $875,000 in total.

The drop in the value of art reflects not the volatile art market but the fluctuating influence peddling market. The Bidens are finally cashing out of Washington.

In the meantime, Hunter is facing a bizarre claim from one of his debt holders that, in return for allegedly walking out on over a year of rent, Hunter sent him art made with his own feces to sell. Shaun Maguire claims that Hunter rented his $4.25 million home in California in 2019. When Hunter’s lawyers denied the story, he posted pictures on social media.

Without getting into the merits of this claim, the question is whether Hunter will sue for defamation. I was previously threatened with a defamation lawsuit for discussing the scandal involving Morris. I continued to write about the allegations (and the threat of a lawsuit) but was never sued. It was an example of the scorched Earth approach of the Hunter team. This is such a bizarre story that it is hard to imagine that it could be true. Conversely, Maguire must have known of the litigious reputation of the Biden team when he decided to go public with this claim.

If this story is untrue, it could constitute defamation per se as a statement that impugns his professional and business reputation. A simple testing of the art would tend to establish the truth of the matter. However, there is no indication of any demand for a retraction or notice to sue. Hunter generally has two years for such a lawsuit, but California has a shorter one-year period.

In the meantime, Hunter has pledged to continue to do his art after his father granted him a sweeping pardon for any crimes committed in the last ten years. Given his past excessive spending on a lavish lifestyle, the art alone does not appear to be a viable source of income. However, Morris has helped create a new movie based on his life. Hunter reportedly celebrated the pardon by watching an early showing of the film.

In the end, Hunter’s work may be the ultimate Pop art, work that only holds value so long as Pop is in power.

Of course, if Nietzsche was right that “the essence of all beautiful art…is gratitude,” Hunter has much to be grateful for. For past and prospective buyers, perhaps less so.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”