June 6 (UPI) — A federal judge Thursday ordered former White House adviser Steve Bannon to report to prison by July 1 after an appeals court upheld his conviction.
Bannon, who briefly served in Donald Trump‘s White House, was found guilty in July 2022 on two counts of contempt of Congress for failing to testify and provide documents to the now-disbanded House Jan. 6 subcommittee.
He was sentenced to serve four months behind bars in October that same year, but he has been able to avoid prison time as he pursued his appeal.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols revoked the pause in Bannon’s sentence after a three-judge D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel last month rejected his appeal.
Nichols on Thursday said, after the appeals court’s decision, he did not believe the basis for continuing to hold off Bannon’s sentence “exists any longer.”
The judge’s ruling is a victory for federal prosecutors, who after the appeals court’s ruling called for Bannon to begin his sentence, arguing “there is no longer a ‘substantial question of law that is likely to result in a reversal or an order for a new trial.'”
Bannon’s lawyer, David Schoen, argued there was “no basis” for his client to begin his sentence immediately, as he can still appeal Nichols’ ruling to the full appeals court and then to the Supreme Court.
Bannon would be the second former Trump adviser to serve prison time for contempt of Congress.
Former Trump aide Peter Navarro is currently serving four months — also on contempt of Congress charges for defying the Jan. 6 subcommittee — despite several last ditch attempts to avoid prison, including a failed Supreme Court appeal.
Nichols, a Trump appointee, has overseen several cases regarding the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. On Wednesday, he sentenced a rioter who assaulted Capitol police with bear spray to more than six years in federal prison.
He also has rejected the governments use of the obstruction of an official proceeding charge, which has been leveled against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants, including Trump.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case in April, with justices in the court’s conservative majority arguing the use of the statute against a Jan. 6 defendant was over broad.
