Judge sets July 18 for Bannon ‘contempt of Congress’ trial

President Donald Trump’s former adviser Steve Bannon will go to trial July 18 on criminal charges that he defied a subpoena from the House committee exploring the causes of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and Donald Trump’s attempt to subvert the 2020 election, a judge ordered Tuesday.

Judge Carl Nichols set the mid-summer schedule after Bannon’s lawyers and Justice Department attorneys wrangled over how quickly the contempt of Congress case should move.

Prosecutors suggested starting the trial in April, while the defense had proposed October.

Nichols, a Trump appointee, said a slew of pretrial motions Bannon’s defense intends to file are no reason to put off a trial for almost a year.

“It seems to me, though … that we don’t need ten months to do this,” the judge said during an hourlong hearing held by videoconference.

However, Nichols also sounded skeptical about the prosecution’s motives for pressing for a trial by April. He called that approach “somewhat anomalous” with the deliberate pace of hundreds of criminal cases the Justice Department has brought against individuals accused of taking part in the Jan. 6 insurrection attempt.

“Essentially, none of those cases have gone to trial,” said Nichols. “They’re languishing a little but ... in this case, which is a misdemeanor and a non-detained defendant, the government wants to go at light speed.”

Nichols also suggested he doesn’t view the case as particularly urgent due to the House panel’s efforts to quickly carry out its work. He noted that the prosecution of Bannon isn’t, at this point, a mechanism to get him to testify or turn over the subpoenaed documents.

“This is not a case through which the committee could get information,” the judge declared.

DOJ argues that the matter is simple: Bannon defied a lawful subpoena by refusing to show up for testimony and produce his records. But Bannon’s lawyers say the case involves complex constitutional issues about executive privilege and whether Bannon is immune from criminal liability because relied on the advice of his lawyer when defying the panel.

Nichols did not indicate whether he agreed with Bannon’s team about the complexity of the case.

During the hearing Tuesday, Bannon lawyer David Schoen — who represented Trump during February’s impeachment trial on an “incitement of insurrection” charge — suggested he wanted internal White House, Justice Department and congressional documents to determine whether the decision to prosecute Bannon had a political motive.

“This was a radical move that they made,” Schoen said of the Justice Department’s decision to bring a criminal case against Bannon, rather than filing a civil suit.

Though it’s rare for DOJ to prosecute “contempt of Congress” cases, it’s also rare for witnesses to display the outright defiance that Bannon did in the lead-up to his indictment. The Jan. 6 committee subpoenaed him for documents and testimony in September, and Bannon refused to comply with either part of that request. He didn’t appear for his scheduled deposition to assert executive privilege or other confidentiality claims.

The House held him in contempt of Congress in late October, and the Justice Department obtained a grand jury indictment of him on the two misdemeanor charges a month later.

The prosecution argued Tuesday that the trial should move quickly because of the public’s right to a speedy trial — particularly in a case in which the defendant is charged with defying a congressional probe.

“The public has a strong interest in this case being addressed,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn said.”The defendant is charged with conduct involving the defiance of a coordinate branch” of government, she added.

Nichols emphasized that Bannon, unlike some of the alleged Jan. 6 rioters, is facing only misdemeanor charges and is not detained pending trial.

Bannon faces a maximum penalty of a year in prison on each count, although Schoen also noted that each charge includes a mandatory minimum of 30 days in jail if convicted.

Nichols said Tuesday that he’s familiar with a lot of the constitutional arguments, but hasn’t decided yet whether any of Bannon’s expected legal arguments have merit.

Prosecutors also said in a court filing Monday that they plan to file a motion to preclude Bannon’s lawyers from arguing to a jury that he didn’t “willfully” defy the subpoena because he was relying on his lawyer’s advice.

Schoen said that stance underscores the defense’s concerns that the grand jury members who indicted Bannon may not have been told about the legal advice that he could ignore the subpoena due to Trump’s privilege claims.

Prosecutors could’ve charged Bannon without involving a grand jury. They have not said why they chose to obtain an indictment.

Nichols said he needs time to give the various legal arguments “due consideration,” but he said he isn’t going to allow the case to lag.

“I intend to resolve the issues as they arise quickly. I’m not going to sit on things for a month,” the judge promised.