The Supreme Court will not delay the prison sentence for Navarro for contempt

Photo of author

By journalsofus.com


Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Monday declined to delay the prison sentence for Peter Navarro, a former top aide to the president. donald trumpas he appeals his conviction for refusing to testify before Congress about his involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Navarro, a 74-year-old economist, is scheduled to report to the federal prison in Miami before 2 p.m. Tuesday.

In a one-paragraph order, Roberts, who oversees emergency requests from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, said he saw no basis to disagree with a ruling by the U.S. appeals court. last week that Navarro must serve time while his appeal is ongoing.

Navarro was sentenced in January four months after a jury found him guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress.

He US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit Last week he rejected Navarro’s request to remain free. A three-judge panel said Navarro “has not demonstrated that his appeal raises substantial issues of law or probable fact.” annul your conviction or sentence.

After the January 6th2021, attack on the United States Capitol, Navarro published a book in which he described a plot to throw the election to Trump during the counting of electoral votes that day. He credited the idea to right-wing podcast host and former Trump strategist Stephen K. Bannon.

When the House committee investigating the attack issued subpoenas for Navarro and Bannon to explain those plans, both ignored them. Now the two are fighting prison sentences for contempt of Congress. However, the District Court judge presiding over Bannon’s case allowed him to remain out of prison while Bannon made an argument on appeal that was not available to Navarro: that by refusing to testify, He trusted the advice of his lawyer.

Navarro’s attorneys, who declined to comment Monday, told the Supreme Court on Friday that their client “certainly does not pose a flight risk or a danger to public safety if released pending appeal.”

The lawyers said their client refused to comply with a congressional subpoena because he thought he had to assert executive privilege. They argued that the law does not make clear whether Congress intended to punish top presidential advisers in such circumstances.

But Navarro had no documentation showing that Trump ever planned to assert that privilege to prevent his aide from testifying, and Trump has never publicly corroborated Navarro’s account.

In denying Navarro’s request on Monday, Roberts agreed with the appeals court’s conclusion that Navarro had waived the right at this stage to challenge the District Court’s conclusion that executive privilege was not invoked.

Rachel Weiner contributed to this report.

Leave a comment