In a hearing Wednesday, a US federal judge in Delaware rejected a plea deal by Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden. After a three-hour proceeding in which US District Judge Maryellen Noreika cited constitutionality concerns with the plea, Biden pleaded not guilty to three tax and firearms offenses charges.

Wednesday’s hearing was intended as a formality between federal prosecutors from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Hunter Biden’s legal counsel, who had already worked out the plea agreement between themselves. Once inside the courtroom, however, it became clear that the two sides disagreed as to what was in the agreement.

At issue are two agreements. The first is a plea agreement. In it, Biden would plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges at 26 U.S.C. § 7203, which carry a maximum penalty of 12 months imprisonment, a $100,000 fine and one year of supervised release—among other requirements. However, under the plea agreement, federal prosecutors suggested that the court sentence Biden to probation. The plea agreement would have also voided the felony gun charge against Biden, so long as he does not commit any further violations over the next two years.

The second agreement is what is referred to as a diversion agreement. In the diversion agreement, federal prosecutors agreed not to pursue any further criminal prosecution based on the evidence uncovered in their investigation. Biden’s future conduct, however, could still be the subject of future prosecutions.

In a transcript of the court proceedings, Biden’s legal counsel stated that they would not agree to the proposed plea deal if it was not accompanied by the diversion agreement. However, prosecutors from the DOJ argued that the plea agreement explicitly stated that the diversion agreement stood separate and alone from the plea. That means that, if the diversion agreement was found not to be valid and enforceable, Biden could still face other charges on the investigation on top of the two tax charges he pleaded.

After a brief recess, it appeared that the issue was settled and that Biden would still enter his plea, even if the diversion agreement was not found to be valid and enforceable. But then Noreika asked how broad the scope of the diversion agreement’s promise not to prosecute was. Again, there was disagreement.

Federal prosecutors stated that the diversion agreement only covered any future prosecutions related to tax evasion for the years contained in the plea agreement—2014 through 2019—and for the firearm that prompted the original firearms charge. That said, prosecutors said they could still seek future prosecutions under the Foreign Agents Registration Act since Biden had dealings with foreign companies. Biden’s legal counsel disagreed, which prompted the prosecutor to state, “Then there is no deal.”

Based on what was stated in court on Wednesday, the DOJ is continuing to investigate Biden’s activities. Republicans in the House of Representatives have also launched their own investigation into Biden’s dealings.

Since Biden pleaded not guilty on Wednesday, there is now another court date set for the end of August to revisit the issue.