Left: Justice Neil Gorsuch (Alex Wong/Getty Images); Center: Peter Navarro (U.S. Government); Chief Justice John Roberts (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, who served under Donald Trump, has asked Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch to perform an end-run around Chief Justice John Roberts over an unsuccessful late March bid to stay out of federal prison.
As of Tuesday, Navarro is two weeks and a day into a four-month prison sentence for two counts of contempt of Congress. He was found guilty following a daylong trial in September 2023.
In January, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta sentenced the 74-year-old economist to prison time and a fine of $9,500 for repeatedly stonewalling congressional investigators working for the House Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
A series of lower court and appellate court appeals followed throughout February and March. Results were consistent and clear: Navarro could, of course, appeal his conviction and sentence — but he had to start serving that sentence when the courts instructed.
Navarro is now appealing his conviction from behind the bars of a lockup facility in Miami. Last month, he angled to remain free on bail while the appeals process fully plays out in a last ditch-direct appeal to the chief justice. But Roberts would not play ball.
In a one-page letter dated Tuesday, Navarro’s attorneys ask Supreme Court Clerk Scott Harris to resubmit their emergency stay application with Gorsuch — who has a penchant for criminal justice reform and who often expresses sympathy for incarcerated people.
The pro-Trump professor makes his case by pointing to an apparent incongruity with arguably dueling timelines of his slated appeal and his already-in-progress tour of the Sunshine State’s federal lockup facility.
“Of note, on March 26, 2024, the D.C. Circuit set a briefing schedule in his appeal, providing that briefing will not be concluded until July 19, 2024, after he is scheduled to have served the entirety of his prison sentence,” the Navarro letter reads. “Accordingly, we respectfully request your reconsideration of the Chief Justice’s denial.”
The renewal application, which simply repackages the already-denied stay appeal part-and-parcel, is allowed under Supreme Court Rule 22.
“A Justice denying an application will note the denial thereon,” the relevant part of the rule reads. “Thereafter, unless action thereon is restricted by law to the Circuit Justice or is untimely under Rule 30.2, the party making an application, except in the case of an application for an extension of time, may renew it to any other Justice, subject to the provisions of this Rule. Except when the denial is without prejudice, a renewed application is not favored.”
There is not a precise deadline for the response due to Navarro. The high court’s rules provide that the clerk will notify all relevant parties “by appropriately speedy means” when the decision is made.
That decision, however, is not likely to be in Navarro’s favor, according to one leading Supreme Court expert.
“The Court’s rules technically permit renewing an application with a second justice,” University of Texas Law Professor Steve Vladeck wrote on X (formerly Twitter) Tuesday afternoon. “In reality, though, the Court automatically refers such filings to the full Court, and then denies them. This has a precisely 0.0% chance of succeeding.”
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
