The chairman of the House subcommittee investigating the intelligence and security failures of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot made a significant intervention at the Supreme Court on Wednesday. He expressed his belief that an earlier investigation into the incident, led by Democrats, was “factually and procedurally invalid” and therefore could not lawfully hold former Trump adviser Stephen Bannon in contempt.
The 11th-hour amicus brief filed by Representative Barry Loudermilk, a Republican from Georgia, arrives as the Supreme Court deliberates on Stephen Bannon’s emergency request. Bannon seeks to delay the start of his four-month prison sentence for contempt of Congress, scheduled for July 1, until the legal disputes are fully resolved, Just the News reported.
“This Court should conclude that the entire prosecutorial process against the applicant was tainted and must be dismissed as a matter of law,” Loudermilk pleaded in his motion. The outlet added:
Loudermilk offered a technical and procedural challenge, arguing the failure of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi to allow Republicans to pick their own ranking member on the Democrat-run Jan. 6 select committee violated the rules Congress set for itself and therefore tainted the committee’s efforts to compel Bannon to testify and to hold him in criminal contempt when he defied a subpoena back in 2022.
“The Select Committee violated the House Rules and House Regulations for the Use of Deposition Authority … which governed the Select Committee’s authority and ability to issue subpoenas and conduct depositions of witnesses,” Loudermilk argued in the brief, which was filed in conjunction with the America First Legal public interest law firm. “The House was not properly informed of this violation when it voted to hold Mr. Bannon in contempt.
“The Select Committee improperly sought to hold Mr. Bannon in contempt for refusing to appear for a deposition because the Select Committee did not have a Ranking Minority Member and, therefore, failed to comply with House Deposition Regulations and H. Res. 503 which required the Chairman of the Select Committee consult with the minority Ranking Member to conduct depositions in response to subpoenas.
“The Select Committee did not have a minority ranking member and therefore could not have complied with its mandate prior to eliciting deposition testimony. Thus, the Select Committee improperly asserted to the House that Mr. Bannon refused to appear for a duly executed deposition. … The Select Committee’s enforcement of the subpoena and the prosecution of Mr. Bannon for failing to participate in a deposition was factually and procedurally invalid. “