\u201cPolitical winds change, but the requirements for criminal prosecution should not\u2014least of all when it comes to a statute fraught with implications for the separation of powers,\u201d Bannon\u2019s petition reads.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
The petition was filed Friday and will be reviewed later this term after the Justice Department has a chance to respond.<\/p>\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/greatamericanewsdesk.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Steve-Bannon.jpeg\")
A Question of Fairness and Executive Privilege<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nBannon\u2019s appeal focuses on whether he \u201cwillfully\u201d ignored the committee\u2019s subpoena \u2014 the legal threshold for contempt. His attorneys argue he acted on the advice of counsel and believed executive privilege issues needed to be resolved before cooperating. Under that interpretation, his actions weren\u2019t criminally \u201cwillful.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, lower courts sided with the Biden Justice Department, saying prosecutors only needed to show Bannon deliberately refused to comply \u2014 regardless of his reasons. Bannon\u2019s lawyers argue that interpretation upends more than a century of precedent and hands Congress unchecked power to criminalize political opponents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Legitimacy of the Jan. 6 Committee in Question<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nBannon\u2019s team also challenges the legitimacy of the Jan. 6 committee itself, arguing its composition violated House rules. The resolution establishing the committee called for 13 members, with five appointed after consulting the minority leader. But then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected several of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy\u2019s picks, leading McCarthy to withdraw all Republican participation. Pelosi then filled the seats with seven Democrats and two hand-picked Republicans, both of whom supported the committee\u2019s mission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Bannon\u2019s lawyers, that procedural breach means the subpoena was never valid in the first place. But the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the argument, calling it a procedural objection that Bannon forfeited by not raising it earlier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Broader Battle Over Accountability and Power<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nThis case follows the Supreme Court\u2019s earlier refusal to intervene on behalf of Peter Navarro, another Trump official convicted for contempt of Congress. But Bannon\u2019s appeal could mark a new test of how far Congress can go in criminally pursuing political figures \u2014 especially when executive privilege and partisan motives are at play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bannon\u2019s team also challenges the legitimacy of the Jan. 6 committee itself, arguing its composition violated House rules. The resolution establishing the committee called for 13 members, with five appointed after consulting the minority leader. But then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected several of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy\u2019s picks, leading McCarthy to withdraw all Republican participation. Pelosi then filled the seats with seven Democrats and two hand-picked Republicans, both of whom supported the committee\u2019s mission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Bannon\u2019s lawyers, that procedural breach means the subpoena was never valid in the first place. But the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the argument, calling it a procedural objection that Bannon forfeited by not raising it earlier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n