Navarro presses DOJ for explanation on not defending his conviction

The Justice Department has reversed its stance in its defense of its prosecution of Peter Navarro — but the Trump aide said he feels entitled to an explanation.

After serving four months in prison in 2024 for defying a subpoena from the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, riots, Navarro has continued to appeal his conviction.

The Trump Justice Department last month delivered what would typically be welcome news to those fighting their case, moving to strike an earlier brief and telling the judge that “it is no longer taking the same position as the prior administration in this case.” It did not, however, provide any legal reasoning for the reversal.

In a late Sunday filing, Navarro said the Justice Department needs to explain why it’s abandoning its prior arguments.

“When the Executive Branch abandons the positions it has aggressively advanced, the interests of candor, transparency, and fairness demand that it explain why. Without such an explanation, the Court and the Appellant are left to speculate whether the decision rests on principled legal grounds or on other, less appropriate, considerations,” Navarro’s attorneys wrote.

In Navarro’s view, simply dropping the case wouldn’t acknowledge his prior arguments — that he was covered by executive privilege when he refused to comply with the committee’s subpoena and that the House overextended its reach in seeking to speak with a senior aide.

The Jan. 6 committee did not wish to speak with Navarro about his then-White House role but rather a three-part report in which the aide alleged there had been widespread election fraud — a false claim President Trump relied on as he challenged his 2020 election loss.

Navarro has a coming book about his experience, “I Went to Prison So You Won’t Have To,” which he describes about his experience “refus[ing] to kneel before the Democrats’ rigged J6 witch hunt.”

Navarro was one of several Trump allies prosecuted and convicted for contempt of Congress after refusing to comply with subpoenas from the panel, a group that also includes Steve Bannon.

In its Aug. 29 filing, the Justice Department did not explain its rationale for seeking to drop the case, but asked that if Navarro’s fight continues, an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court” be appointed to represent the opposing side.