Chief Justice John Roberts on Monday turned down Navarro’s emergency motion

quote:

---

Peter Navarro, a former trade adviser in Donald Trump’s White House, appears to be heading to jail.

Chief Justice John Roberts on Monday turned down Navarro’s emergency motion to stave off his imminent jail sentence — set to begin Tuesday at 2 p.m. in a Miami federal prison — for his defiance of a subpoena from the House Jan. 6 committee two years ago.

---

quote:

---

Departing from the practice in most serious or high-profile legal fights, Roberts ruled on Navarro’s request himself, without referring it to the full court. The chief justice noted that a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that Navarro failed to raise several challenges to the fairness of his conviction when he first sought to remain free pending appeal.

“I see no basis to disagree with the determination that Navarro forfeited those arguments in the release proceeding, which is distinct from his pending appeal on the merits,” Roberts wrote in his one-page order, emphasizing that the door remains open to the ex-Trump aide to challenge his convictions themselves.

An attorney for Navarro declined to comment on the chief justice’s ruling.

---

quote:

---

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, Circuit Justice. The application for release pending appeal under 18 U. S. C. §3143(b) is denied. This application concerns only the question whether the applicant, Peter Navarro, has met his burden to establish his entitlement to relief under the Bail Reform Act. The Court of Appeals disposed of the pro- ceeding on the ground that Navarro “forfeited” any argu- ment in this release proceeding challenging the District Court’s conclusion that “executive privilege was not in- voked,” “forfeited any challenge” to the conclusion that re- lief would not be required in any event because of the qual- ified nature of executive privilege, and “forfeited any challenge” to the conclusion that apart from executive priv- ilege, he was still obligated to appear before Congress and answer questions seeking information outside the scope of the asserted privilege. Order in No. 24–3006 (DC, Mar. 14, 2024). I see no basis to disagree with the determination that Navarro forfeited those arguments in the release pro- ceeding, which is distinct from his pending appeal on the merits.

---