Trump adviser loses appeal of January 6-related contempt of Congress conviction

Trump adviser loses appeal of January 6: Appeal of January 6 Contempt Conviction Qwenews.com – A federal appeals court in Washington, DC, on Tuesday

Trump Adviser Loses Appeal of January 6 Contempt Conviction

Qwenews.com – A federal appeals court in Washington, DC, on Tuesday rejected Peter Navarro’s effort to overturn his contempt of Congress felony conviction. The unanimous ruling by three judges on the DC US Circuit Court of Appeals represents another setback for a Trump adviser loses appeal of January 6-related legal challenge. The decision emphasizes Navarro’s inability to demonstrate that President Trump intended to protect him from congressional testimony.

Executive Privilege Claim Rejected

Navarro was convicted in 2023 for defying congressional subpoenas connected to his public assertions about attempting to prevent Congress from certifying Trump’s defeat in the 2020 presidential election. The House Select Committee investigating the Capitol riot requested both records and testimony, but Navarro refused to comply. Although he has already completed a federal prison sentence, Navarro has spent years arguing that Trump instructed him to ignore the House’s demands, pointing to what he described as a formal executive privilege claim.

The DC Circuit panel, consisting of Judges Patricia Millett, Nina Pillard, and Michelle Childs, dismissed this argument as insufficient. “Dr. Navarro first asserted executive privilege unilaterally without consulting with or receiving direction from President Trump,” the opinion, written by Millett, stated.

“Dr. Navarro immediately and categorically asserted executive privilege without consulting anyone … He did so before even seeing the subpoena and its cover letter that made clear the subpoena sought some information that Dr. Navarro concedes is not privileged because he had discussed it publicly.”

The appeals court noted that Navarro lacked documentation proving Trump told him during a three-minute phone call to defy the committee’s subpoena. Both a Trump attorney and an adviser who testified before a grand jury against Navarro confirmed that Trump never formally decided Navarro should be shielded. The court found that Navarro’s “purported good-faith defense” was undermined by his actions.

The court also observed that both the executive branch during the Biden administration and Congress pursued accountability when Navarro was indicted and tried. The Trump administration allowed the appeal to proceed. “As it turns out, the Political Branches are entirely in accord this time. Congress held Dr. Navarro in contempt,” Millett wrote. “And the Executive both informed Dr. Navarro that his assertion of executive privilege was unjustified and exercised its exclusive authority to bring this prosecution.”

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents. Navarro, currently serving as a White House trade adviser, and Steve Bannon, another longtime Trump confidant, have both sought to reverse their convictions through the courts. Both served federal prison time in 2024 for defying House subpoenas regarding January 6.

When Congress issued subpoenas and the Justice Department prosecuted them, Bannon and Navarro were private citizens while Trump was between his two presidential terms. Even after Trump returned to the presidency last year, neither man received a presidential pardon, despite the extensive clemency Trump granted to January 6-related defendants and other allies. With their appeals continuing, the Justice Department told courts this year it wanted the charges against Bannon dismissed.

Navarro’s legal team indicated they do not seek dismissal like Bannon’s case. “The decision today from the D.C. Circuit panel was not surprising and Peter Navarro knew that it would be one step in a battle to correct decades of incorrect DC Circuit precedent,” Navarro attorney Abhishek Kambli said in a statement to CNN on Tuesday.

“He intends to move swiftly with his appeal because his case affects every senior presidential advisor, regardless of political party, who believes in good faith they cannot comply with a congressional subpoena based on executive privilege.” This story has been updated with additional details.