House Republicans are finally lining up to back Stephen K. Bannon, a Trump ally and TV host, and his emergency request to avoid jail time for failing to comply with a Jan. 6 committee subpoena.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) and other House Republican leaders on a bipartisan legal advisory group voted Tuesday to file a brief in support of Bannon with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Oversight, also plans to file an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Bannon’s emergency appeal.
The arguments in the brief could not only persuade the Supreme Court to release Bannon from prison, but also have an impact on other American prisoners.
The Loudermilk committee also
Reportedly They are drafting legislation aimed at nullifying the committee’s work on January 6th.
“It’s great what the committee is doing here, and something that is more likely to keep Bannon out of jail than an attempt to quash the subpoena (which was only done once pre-indictment by the committee that issued the subpoena),” said Christopher Bedford, senior political editor and Washington correspondent at Blaze Media.
background
Bannon was convicted in July 2022 of two counts of contempt of Congress and sentenced to four months in prison for failing to comply with a subpoena from a Democratic-dominated House select committee tasked with investigating the Jan. 6 protests.
Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee presiding over Bannon’s case in Washington, D.C., initially suspended the sentence while the populist appealed his conviction, but a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals later rejected Bannon’s challenge, leaving partisan prosecutors urging Judge Nichols to send Bannon to prison.
Earlier this month, Bannon was ordered to report to prison by July 1. But he had two more arrows left in his quiver: an en banc panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals or an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The first arrow missed the target.
On June 20, Biden and Obama judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 2-1 to deny Bannon prison time while he exhausts his legal options.
Blaze News previously reported that TrumpNominations Judge Justin Walker, who was the lone vote in denying Bannon’s emergency motion, noted in his dissent that Bannon’s key arguments could stand before the Supreme Court.
Appeal to the High Court
Bannon
submitted An appeal was filed at the Supreme Court on Friday.
The filing emphasized that the stakes are high, stating that “the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has
Licavoli While the binding provisions remain in place, there is no bar to future prosecution of anyone who allegedly fails to comply with a congressional subpoena, even if they have a bona fide defense such as advice of counsel or executive privilege. Licavoli They will be barred from even making statements in front of a jury.”
In his defense, Bannon suggested he did not comply with the subpoena both on the advice of counsel and based on executive privilege.
“In a future where the House or Senate and the executive branch are controlled by the same political party, it stands to reason that former executive branch officials who refuse to provide classified materials to a committee could risk going to jail, even if that position was based on the good faith advice of their lawyers and a request for further negotiations,” the document adds.
Bannon’s lawyers further argued that the Biden Department of Justice’s recent decision to ignore congressional subpoenas ”
Intentional “At issue is whether this issue exists as a matter of law, and the absurdity of Mr. Bannon’s inability to even argue to a jury that his reliance on counsel’s advice weakened the government’s ‘willfulness’ claim.”
The Justice Department is scheduled to file a brief with the Supreme Court on Wednesday calling for the immediate jailing of critics of President Trump.
House Republicans take action
Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) has pressed House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) to lead a legal effort to support Bannon’s emergency appeal.
Bank
I got it. “Several factors distinguish the Committee’s illegal and unenforceable subpoenas: [to Bannon and Peter Navarro] From a lawfully issued congressional subpoena.”
“As you know, this committee is the first and only congressional committee in history that is structured entirely along partisan lines,” Banks continued.
“We believe the January 6th committee was improperly constituted. We believe its work was tainted.”
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (California) on January 6
Rejected Committee members proposed by then-Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy recused themselves and boycotted the committee, contrary to McCarthy’s suggestions. Ultimately, there were no Republican-appointed minority members on the committee.
“Furthermore, the Committee has repeatedly violated the House Rules and its charter, House Resolution 503, including provisions restricting the right to depositions,” Banks wrote.
In addition to the potential illegality, Banks noted that thanks to the work of Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), “we discovered that the committee deleted hundreds of records just prior to the taking of the 118th Congress and the House Republican majority. This deliberate destruction of evidence violated House rules, and the improperly destroyed documents may have contained evidence of committee wrongdoing that could have aided Mr. Bannon or Mr. Navarro’s defense in any future appeal.”
Banks stressed to Johnson that Johnson fully supports the amicus brief filed on behalf of the Chamber in support of Bannon’s appeal.
Johnson
Confirmed On Tuesday night, Fox News and CNN reported that the House of Representatives was working on preparing an amicus brief to support Bannon’s appeal.
“We believe the January 6th committee was improperly constituted. We believe its work was tainted. We believe they successfully suppressed evidence and may have engaged in more nefarious activity as well,” Johnson said. “We’re going to convey that to the court, and we think that will help Steve Bannon in his appeal.”
Johnson
I got it. In a joint statement Wednesday morning, Republican Reps. Steve Scalise of Louisiana and Tom Emmer of Minnesota said the amicus brief “was filed after Mr. Bannon filed a petition for en banc review and will not be supported by either party.”
“The House of Representatives is withdrawing several assertions made in the early stages of litigation regarding the formation of a special committee in the last Congress to investigate the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. House Republican leadership continues to believe that Speaker Pelosi abused her power in forming the special committee,” Johnson added.
Daily Caller
report Loudermilk plans to file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning, emphasizing that the Jan. 6 committee does not have the authority to take depositions under the House resolution that authorized them.
Loudermilk’s office told the Caller that the report shows the committee held Bannon in contempt for “failing to appear at a deposition” on January 6. The committee was unable to hold a deposition because it had no senior members to notify.
“The two-year interrogation of Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney may have entertained the media and kept a lot of Democratic lawyers busy, but it had very real-world consequences, as seen with the imprisonment of Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon,” Loudermilk told the Caller.
“We are in uncharted constitutional territory. Congress’ power to compel people to appear is long established, but that power has been weakened since Eric Holder refused to serve a subpoena on himself. The power to drop a contempt charge after the fact is difficult, but the power to convince a court that the commission itself is unlawful? That may be easier,” Christopher Bedford told The Blaze News.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this directly to your inbox. Register here!
