On Tuesday, Peter Navarro begged Justice Neil Gorsuch to stay his four-month sentence while his appeal plays out. This Hail Mary is Navarro’s second bite at the apple. Appealing to one parent after the other has told you “no” may work in some families. But I hope the Supreme Court — as ethically delinquent as it is — will swat this pestilent pipsqueak away.
The first time around, last March 18, Navarro asked SCOTUS to let him remain free while he challenged his contempt of Congress conviction before the federal appeals court in Washington, DC. Chief Justice John Roberts told Petey to feck off — and Navarro reported to prison the following day. Now, 15 days into his stretch, Navarro wants a different answer.
How did it come to this?
On February 9, 2022, the January 6 House Select Committee issued two subpoenas to Peter Navarro, demanding he provide documents and testimony relevant to the Capitol insurrection. He ignored both of them. Now Navarro is serving four months in a federal pen for his crimes.
It did not have to be this way. Navarro should have shown up to Congress and professed to have forgotten everything he had done. He could have promised a sincere attempt to track down the paperwork the Committee was looking for — and then waited for the anticipated GOP takeover of the House in the 2022 midterms. And he would have been golden.
But Navarro so overestimated his intellectual capacity and powers of persuasion that he swanned into court expecting everyone to apologize for inconveniencing him. The Judge did not see it that way and gave him time away from the daily cares of a free man. Navarro will not accept his lot. And here we are.
Will Navarro succeed? You would like to think not. If nothing else, collegial respect would seem to demand that Gorsuch back up Roberts and call it a day. But let us have a look at Navarro’s position.
His attorneys had argued that pausing a lower court’s ruling rejecting a bid to avoid prison is warranted when the person making the request is not a flight risk and is raising substantial legal questions. Navarro said his case would “raise a number of issues on appeal that he contends are likely to result in the reversal of his conviction, or a new trial.”
Really? So far, that argument has not advance this criminal’s cause. What does he expect Gorsuch to see that no other Judge in the DC legal community has seen? The cynic in me — which is growing every day — wonders if the shadowy forces who think Trump and his insurrectionist gang should be free to piss on the law have whispered in Gorsuch’s ear. Can it be that bad? I guess we will find out.
Navarro had a fair trial. Judge Mehta denied his request to postpone his sentence while he appealed. In turn, Navarro appealed to the DC Court of Appeals. They agreed with the trial judge. As mentioned above, Roberts concurred. These were not the serial loser’s only defeats.
Just yesterday, the DC Court of Appeals yesterday, in an unsigned order, told Navarro that his theory that the Justice Department had no authority to enforce the Presidential Records Act was legal codswallop.
Just how many attempts to change his fate does Navarro get? Most Americans would be one and done and counting the days until freedom. But in the US, extra justice is doled out to those who can afford it. And those who have powerful allies. As a taxpayer, I do not begrudge the cost of the criminal justice system. But come on, there has to be a limit.
Although that limit has yet to embrace Steve Bannon, who was also sentenced to four months for contempt of Congress after he ignored subpoenas — yet remains a free man. The only silver lining I can find here is that Bannon’s freedom must be driving Navarro nuts.
