On March 17, 2025, President Donald Trump made a bold decision—he immediately revoked Secret Service protection for Hunter and Ashley Biden, the adult children of former President Joe Biden.
This move, unprecedented in modern politics, sparked a heated debate over security, taxpayer spending, and political retribution.
Why Did Trump Revoke Their Protection?
Trump justified his decision by pointing to the high cost of maintaining security for Hunter and Ashley Biden. According to reports, Hunter had 18 Secret Service agents assigned to him, while Ashley had 13.
The former president questioned why taxpayers should foot the bill for their safety, especially when they no longer held any official government roles.
His criticism didn’t stop there.
Trump took aim at Hunter Biden’s recent trip to South Africa, condemning the country’s human rights record and announcing plans to remove it from the U.S. economic assistance list.
This statement added a geopolitical angle to what many saw as a domestic political feud.
What Are the Rules for Secret Service Protection?
To understand the significance of Trump’s decision, it’s essential to know how Secret Service protection works.
- Former Presidents & Spouses: They receive lifetime protection.
- Children of Presidents: Once they turn 16, they lose protection when their parent leaves office.
- Extensions: Outgoing presidents can grant an additional six months of security.
In this case, Joe Biden had used his authority to extend protection for his children until July 2025.
Trump’s intervention cut that extension short, raising questions about whether such protections should be left to political discretion.
The Bigger Debate: Security vs. Taxpayer Spending
With the Secret Service confirming that it will follow Trump’s directive, the conversation has now shifted to the broader implications.
Some see this move as a justified cost-cutting measure, arguing that private citizens should not receive taxpayer-funded security.
Others believe it sets a dangerous precedent where personal security decisions become politicized.
Conclusion: A Political Storm in the Making
Trump’s decision to revoke Secret Service protection for Hunter and Ashley Biden isn’t just about security—it’s a reflection of the ongoing political war between Trump and the Biden family.
Whether this move was about fiscal responsibility or political vengeance, it highlights the fine line between government duty and partisan battles.
As the story unfolds, it may redefine how America views security for the families of former presidents.