In a stunning court filing, Lunden Roberts has demanded that Hunter Biden be locked up for allegedly dodging a child support deal involving their daughter, Navy Joan Roberts.

On Jan. 13, Roberts filed a motion with the Circuit Court of Independence County, Arkansas, requesting Hunter Biden’s incarceration for failing to comply with a prior court-approved agreement.

This arrangement, settled in 2023, reduced Biden’s child support payments and required him to provide a specific number of his paintings to Navy Joan. The motion also seeks an increase in support payments to match what Biden provides for his other children, the Daily Caller reported.

Hunter Biden’s Alleged Non-Compliance Sparks Outrage

The issue has sparked heated debate over personal responsibility and legal accountability. While some see this as a private family matter, others view it as a public display of privilege clashing with court mandates.

Roberts and Biden’s legal saga began in 2019 when she took him to court after he initially refused to acknowledge paternity. A DNA test confirmed he was the father of Navy Joan, leading to a reported $20,000 monthly support payment before the 2023 reduction. The settlement also kept the child’s last name as Roberts, despite her mother’s push for Biden’s surname.

As part of the 2023 deal, Biden was ordered to give the Navy Joan's selected paintings, an arrangement tied to their value while his father, Joe Biden, served as president. The motion claims Biden suggested this art exchange after an emotional moment during a deposition in Little Rock, Arkansas, where Roberts brought artwork their daughter made for him. He reportedly pitched it as a way to bond over a shared love of art.

Paintings Promised, but Terms Disputed

According to the filing, Navy Joan has received some paintings, but not the ones she picked, which Roberts argues violates the court’s terms. “A specified number of paintings he had created and that she selected,” the motion insists, pointing to a clear breach if true. If Biden’s handpicking the art is indeed sidestepping the deal, it raises questions about following through on promises.

Biden reportedly began building a connection with Navy Joan through scheduled calls, a small step toward family ties. But the motion alleges he abruptly cut contact after Roberts published a memoir in 2024. This “ghosting,” as described, left the child without a word from her father since.

Roberts claims she discussed their past in her book without malice, as the motion notes, “but neither disparaged nor derided him.” Yet, the timing of Biden’s silence suggests a grudge, or at least a convenient excuse to disengage. If true, it’s a sad turn for a child caught in adult disputes.

Call for Incarceration Stirs Controversy

The filing doesn’t hold back, demanding, “The defendant should be incarcerated in the Independence County Detention Center as a criminal penalty for flaunting the dignity and authority of this court.” That’s a bold line, but is jail the answer for a support spat? It feels like a hammer when a nudge might do.

Roberts also states she’s reached out to Biden about their daughter, only to be met with silence. This alleged refusal to communicate doesn’t paint a flattering picture of parental duty. It’s hard to see this as anything but a dodge of responsibility.

Looking at the broader picture, the reduced support in 2023 was Biden’s own request, which the court granted. Now, Roberts wants payments bumped up to equal what his other children receive, a fair ask if the disparity is real. Equality under the law should extend to family obligations.

Legal Battle Reflects Deeper Issues

The backstory adds layers—Roberts reportedly worked at a D.C. strip club Biden frequented, a detail that’s irrelevant to child welfare but fuels tabloid chatter. What matters is Navy Joan’s well-being, not the parents’ past. Let’s keep the focus where it belongs.

This case isn’t just about paintings or payments; it’s about whether court orders mean anything when the defendant has a famous last name. If Biden’s ignoring the rules, it sends a message that influence trumps accountability. That’s a precedent no one should want.

Roberts’ push for jail time might seem harsh, but it underscores a frustration with perceived double standards. Courts aren’t suggestion boxes—they’re binding. If Biden’s actions undermine that, consequences should follow, famous father or not.