Since September 7, former Trump advisor Peter Navarro has faced close scrutiny from the legal community and the public following his conviction for contempt of Congress. This ruling came after Navarro failed to comply with a subpoena from the January 6 Select Committee.[1] His guilt was established, but almost immediately, Navarro’s lawyers moved for a mistrial[2].
A notable aspect of the motion for a new trial was its reasoning. Navarro’s lawyer, Stan Woodward, claimed that the jury was subject to external influence through their exposure to protestors[3]. He alleged the protestors, which expressed disapproval of the Trump Administration, could have swayed the jury’s opinion.
However, this appeal for a new trial was denied by Judge Amit Mehta after due deliberation. The court noted that Navarro couldn’t complain of external influences after gambling on a favorable verdict[4].
Even if Navarro’s objections had been raised at the correct time, they would still have failed, according to Judge Mehta. He observed no significant interaction between the jurors and the protestors in available video footage.
Navarro, who was notably selected by Jared Kushner via an Amazon search for economists backing a trade war with China, has had quite the career[5]. After championing hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19[6], he then controversially claimed the unlikelihood of Biden’s win[7].
He now joins Steve Bannon, another player in the January 6 plot, known as the “Green Bay Sweep”, and is included on Trump’s potential list of pardons if he retakes the presidency[8].
For more details on the case, visit the legal docket[9].