WASHINGTON—Peter Navarro, a former Trump White House adviser, has been sentenced to four months in prison and ordered to pay $9,500 in fines for his refusal to comply with congressional subpoenas that he said were covered by executive privilege.
“I haven’t heard a word of contrition from Dr. Navarro since this case began,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said during Mr. Navarro’s sentencing hearing on Jan. 25. While issuing his sentence, Judge Mehta noted Mr. Navarro’s academic accomplishments and said that he didn’t “come from means” and “overcame financial challenges” in his life.
He said that the country “owes a debt of gratitude” to Mr. Navarro for his work on the coronavirus.
The sentencing hearing started with Judge Mehta reviewing the defense’s objections to statements made in legal filings alleging a lack of communication with the House select committee investigating Jan. 6, 2021, after his Feb. 9, 2022, subpoena.
Mr. Navarro had received subpoenas from the committee and, in September 2023, a jury found him guilty of two counts related to contempt of Congress: willful failure to provide records and willful failure to appear for testimony. Each charge carried the possibility of a $100,000 fine and 30 days to a year in prison.
During his closing remarks, Judge Mehta seemed to scold Mr. Navarro, telling him that the words “executive privilege” weren’t “magical,” or a “get out of jail free card.”
He also criticized Mr. Navarro for purportedly not acknowledging his role as an American to cooperate with Congress. Judge Mehta went on to defend the Jan. 6 committee: “They had a job to do and you made it harder. ... It wasn’t a kangaroo court. The public can see that.”
Judge Mehta seemed incredulous that Mr. Navarro wanted him to think the prosecution was political in nature. He told Mr. Navarro: “You are not a victim. You are not the object of a political prosecution ... you have received every process that you are due.”
The defense and Judge Mehta discussed the need for Mr. Navarro to acknowledge wrongdoing. He said Mr. Navarro didn’t express a clear acceptance of responsibility and noted that his sentencing memo accused the Department of Justice of a politicized prosecution. That “seems to me the opposite of accepting responsibility,” Judge Mehta said.
“Just another quiet day of put Peter in prison and free the [Jan. 6] prisoner signs outside the courtroom as jurors in the middle of deliberations inexplicably roam free,” Mr. Navarro told The Epoch Times at the time. “Nothing apparently to see here.”
His sentencing memo requested no more than six months of probation and a fine of $100 for each count. It also requested the court grant Mr. Navarro release pending appeal.
His legal team argued that he didn’t willfully disobey the subpoenas because former President Donald Trump had invoked executive privilege.
“Dr. Navarro’s actions do not stem from a disrespect for the law, nor do they stem from any belief that he is above the law,” his sentencing memo read. “Rather, Dr. Navarro acted because he reasonably believed he was duty-bound to assert executive privilege on former President Trump’s behalf.”
After the sentencing, Mr. Navarro spoke outside the courthouse amid heckling with whistles and cowbell noises. He noted that his attorney had already filed an appeal in the case, which he said was “destined for the Supreme Court.”
Navarro Speaks
Mr. Navarro spoke during the hearing despite his attorney saying he had been advised against doing so.Judge Mehta had told Mr. Navarro’s attorney, Stan Woodward, that he had a “great deal of respect” for Mr. Navarro, which made the situation even more “disappointing for him.” He said that Mr. Navarro knew better than to make certain public statements, which contribute to “why our politics are so corrosive.”
Mr. Navarro thanked the judge during his statement and claimed he was led to believe that executive privilege had been invoked and accepted. At one point, he told Judge Mehta that proving “mens rea,” the legal concept that a defendant knew their conduct was illegal, “apparently doesn’t matter in this courtroom.”
Judge Mehta interrupted and argued that he himself didn’t prevent Mr. Navarro from utilizing mens rea, but instead, his reading of the law led him to believe that it should be excluded.
Mr. Navarro also touched on the events of Jan. 6, 2021. “I don’t want to bring politics in but we can respectfully disagree about the political environment surrounding all of this,” he said.
He noted that “the minute” violence erupted on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6, 2021, it became one of the worst days of his life.
Executive Privilege
Mr. Navarro’s attorneys argued that “Dr. Navarro’s conviction reflects the application of antiquated, questionable precedent in this District. History is replete [with] those to [sic] have refused to comply with congressional subpoenas, and Dr. Navarro’s sentence should not be disproportionate from those similarly situated individuals.”Mr. Navarro is just one of many Trump associates to face prosecution related to the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and the subsequent congressional investigation.
His attorneys pointed to how the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was considering an appeal from Steve Bannon, a former Trump White House adviser, who claimed he followed his attorney’s advice in not complying with a congressional subpoena because President Trump had invoked executive privilege. Mr. Bannon was sentenced to four months in prison but his sentence has been stayed pending appeal.
Mr. Navarro’s attorneys argued that their client’s case was different from Mr. Bannon’s given that the latter’s “subpoena sought hardly any information related to Mr. Bannon’s brief tenure in the White House, and the government took the position that Mr. Bannon’s status as a private citizen and that the materials sought related to matters he took as a private citizen prevented him from raising executive privilege.”
The Department of Justice (DOJ), meanwhile, called Mr. Navarro’s executive privilege defense “meritless.”
Mr. Navarro, it said, “consistently shielded his defiance behind claims of executive privilege he knew to be meritless, and did so because of his contempt for the Committee and its mission.”
“The sentence imposed on the Defendant must vindicate the authority of Congress to investigate matters of national importance and demonstrate that attacks on Congress’s lawful authority as a co-equal branch of government will not be tolerated,” its sentencing memo read.
‘Thumbed His Nose’
The DOJ asked Judge Mehta on Jan. 18 for Mr. Navarro to receive a six-month prison sentence. Prosecutors alleged that Mr. Navarro “thumbed his nose at congressional authority” with his refusal to comply with the subpoena.Instead of abiding by the congressional request on a matter of “national importance,” Mr. Navarro, “like the rioters at the Capitol, put politics, not country, first, and stonewalled Congress’s investigation,” the DOJ’s sentencing memo read.
“The Defendant chose allegiance to former President Donald Trump over the rule of law even after being apprised that executive privilege would not excuse his default. For his sustained, deliberate contempt of Congress, the Defendant should be sentenced to six months’ imprisonment for each count—the top end of the applicable United States Sentencing Guidelines’ range—and fined $200,000,” the memo read.
The brief noted that the prison terms could be imposed concurrently. “The mandatory minimum sentence of one month in prison is insufficient to account for, punish, and deter the Defendant’s criminal offenses,” it read. “For each Count, the Court should instead impose a sentence of six months’ imprisonment.”
Mr. Navarro’s attorneys accused the DOJ of betraying its duty of impartiality in multiple ways.
“The government’s betrayal is manifest of its true motive—the prosecution of a senior presidential advisor of a chief political opponent,” a brief from his legal team reads.
