Court upholds Bannon contempt conviction
WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court has upheld the contempt conviction of Steve Bannon, the political strategist and former White House aide to Donald Trump, for defying a subpoena about the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021.
A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that Bannon’s arguments had no merit.
The decision clears the way for Bannon to serve a four-month prison sentence unless he appeals to the full circuit court or to the Supreme Court and they agree to continue postponing his incarceration during the appeal.
Bannon was one of two people convicted, along with former White House aide Peter Navarro, for defying congressional subpoenas for the Jan. 6 inquiry.
His petition held the prospect of setting new rules governing the assertion of executive privilege. But the appeals panel found no reason to depart from previous rulings that bar “willfully” defying a congressional subpoena.
“As both this court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly explained, a contrary rule would contravene the text of the contempt statute and hamstring Congress’s investigatory authority,” Judge Bradley Garcia wrote.
Bannon lawyer David Schoen did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
His client was convicted at trial in July 2022, sentenced to four months in jail and fined $6,500. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols allowed Bannon to remain free because the appeal “raises a substantial question of law that is likely to result in a reversal or an order for a new trial,” Schoen wrote.
The House committee that investigated the attack by Trump supporters trying to prevent the certification of his defeat sought testimony and documents from Bannon for insight about Trump’s strategies after losing the 2020 election.
For instance, Bannon told associates from China on Oct. 31, 2020, that Trump would falsely declare victory even if he lost and said it would be a “firestorm.”
He also called Trump at least twice on Jan. 5, 2021.
One argument that Bannon made was that he relied on the advice of a previous lawyer that he need not testify. But the appeals court ruled that Bannon’s “‘advice of counsel’ defense is no defense at all.”
Bannon also argued the subpoena was illegitimate because of how the House committee was created. But federal courts have upheld the panel’s subpoenas.
Prosecutors led by U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves argued successfully in the appeal that Bannon was required to appear and challenge each question under potential executive privilege one at a time. Instead, Bannon refused to appear at all.
“In fact, President Trump’s attorney correctly cautioned that Bannon was not immune from testifying,” prosecutors wrote. “The subpoena focused on Bannon’s activities as a private citizen and addressed many topics for which executive privilege could not possibly apply.”
Prosecutors said the subpoena sought information largely unrelated to the White House, from after Bannon left, such as his “War Room” podcast, financing for people who attended the Jan. 6 rally, communications with Congress and communications with farright extremist groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.
The House voted to hold four people in contempt and urged the Justice Department to charge them criminally for defying subpoenas. They included Dan Scavino, former White House deputy chief of staff for communications, who coordinated Trump’s social media and was not charged.
Navarro is serving his four-month sentence in a federal jail in Florida.