A divided federal appeals court panel in Washington rejected Steve Bannon’s emergency bid to stay out of prison while he appealed his contempt of Congress conviction. The rejection moves the Donald Trump Overall, the Supreme Court still intervened.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit split 2-1 in rejecting Thursday evening. Bannon’s offer does not raise a “negative question” that warrants relief, said the two justices in the majority, Barack Obama appointee Cornelia Pillard and Joe Biden appointee Bradley Garcia.
The dissenting judge, Trump appointee Justin Walker, said major questions remain about the interpretation of the contempt statute. He wrote that while the D.C. Circuit is bound by its precedent to rule on his underlying appeal against Bannon, the Supreme Court, which is not so bound, could take a different position.
Walker concluded that “because that question may well be material, Bannon should not go to prison until the Supreme Court considers his pending petition for certiorari.”
In his motion, Bannon’s attorneys had asked the appeals court to rule by June 18 “to allow sufficient time to seek further relief from the Supreme Court if necessary.”
Another former Trump adviser, Peter Navarro, recently lost a similar bid to stay out of jail pending an appeal over his own contempt of Congress conviction; he is currently serving that sentence. Navarro took his failed attempt all the way to the Supreme Court, where Chief Justice John Roberts took the rare step of writing an op-ed explaining why Navarro should not remain free while he appealed. Both Bannon and Navarro were convicted for refusing to comply with the House committee’s Jan. 6 investigation.
In his request to the appeals court, Bannon’s attorneys cited Roberts’ opinion dismissing Navarro. They wrote that as “the Dr. Navarro presented underlying merits were of no importance or substance, presumably Chief Justice Roberts would have simply denied the request without explanation,” adding that Roberts noted procedural issues with Navarro’s claim for emergency relief, as Bannon’s attorneys say. are not present with their client.
Federal prosecutors opposed Bannon’s release request, writing to the appeals court that speculation about why Roberts wrote the opinion does not mean the Supreme Court would be interested in Bannon’s case. Now that his release bid heads to the judges, we’ll know if the Supreme Court is interested. Relief there is still far from guaranteed, but Walker’s dissent could give Bannon hope for a different outcome than Navarro’s.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for weekly updates on the top legal stories, including Supreme Court news, the Donald Trump cases and more.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
