The Supreme Court’s chief justice on March 18 rejected former Trump White House aide Peter Navarro’s emergency petition to delay his prison sentence.
The decision came a day before Mr. Navarro was to report to federal prison to serve his four-month sentence for defying a congressional subpoena.
In issuing the order, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said he had “no basis to disagree” with the appeals court ruling, though he added that the finding wouldn’t affect the outcome of Mr. Navarro’s appeal.
Mr. Navarro was convicted in September 2023 on two counts of contempt of Congress after he failed to comply with a subpoena from the House Jan. 6 select committee.
His initial request to delay his sentence pending appeal was denied in February by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who held that the trade adviser to former President Donald Trump failed to present any substantial questions of law in his motion that would likely yield a better result.
“Appellant has not shown that his appeal presents substantial questions of law or fact likely to result in reversal, new trial, a sentence that does not include a term of imprisonment, or a reduced sentence of imprisonment that is less than the amount of time already served plus the expected duration of the appeal process,” the three-judge panel ruled.
“For the first time in our nation’s history, a senior presidential advisor has been convicted of contempt of Congress after asserting executive privilege over a congressional subpoena,” Mr. Navarro’s attorneys wrote.
“Navarro is indisputably neither a flight risk nor a danger to public safety should he be released pending appeal.”
In response to Justice Roberts’s ruling, Mr. Navarro released a statement on March 18 saying he would continue to appeal his case, even if a resolution comes after the end of his prison sentence, as “the constitutional separation of powers will be irreparably damaged and doctrine of executive privilege … will cease to function,” if the appeal fails, he said.
He said his “partisan” imprisonment should “chill the bones of every American.”
“In Joe Biden’s weaponized justice system, a Democrat controlled Congress and Justice Department together with an Obama-appointed District Judge and three Obama-appointed Appeals Court judges drove the Navarro railroad right into prison.
“If anybody thinks these partisans and politicians in robes aren’t coming for Donald Trump, they must think twice now,” Mr. Navarro added.
In a March 15 letter, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) urged fellow Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), chairman of the House Administration Oversight Committee, to “conduct further oversight” over the committee’s decision to recommend contempt of Congress charges against former Trump administration officials.
“As you are likely aware, former White House Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro has been ordered to report to prison next week based on his refusal to comply with the demands of the committee that has been shown to be illegitimately constituted and hopelessly tainted,” Mr. Biggs wrote.
The congressman told The Epoch Times last week that his concern was that the committee’s work was influenced by political bias.
“That Mr. Navarro is required to report to federal prison for refusing to comply with an illegitimate committee’s demands is indicative of our nation’s two-tiered justice system,” Mr. Biggs said.
“Throwing political opponents behind bars is a cruel move more likely to be seen in communist China and banana republics around the world. We must swiftly bring this practice to an end if we hope to protect our republic.”
Mr. Navarro has been ordered to surrender himself to the Federal Correctional Institution in Miami no later than 2 p.m. on March 19.
Meanwhile, the high court is set to hear oral arguments next month in another case involving Jan. 6—President Trump’s federal election obstruction case.
The former president’s legal team holds that presidential immunity exempts him from prosecution in the election case being brought against him by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith. They also contend that based on double jeopardy principles, President Trump can’t be prosecuted over conduct for which he was already impeached and acquitted by the U.S. Senate.
The Supreme Court will hear those arguments during the week of April 22.
