The Court of Appeals panel held today that it does not have the authority to overrule the 1961 panel of the Court that issued the decision in the Licavoli case on the definition of the word "Willfully" as used in the Contempt of Congress statute.
The Department of Justice argued before the Court that this panel did not have the authority to overrule the Licavoli panel's decision - only the full Court sitting en banc can do that.
Mr. Costello wrote to the committee and told them that Mr. Bannon would fully comply with the subpoena if the the committee worked out any privilege issues with President Trump or they took the matter before a court and the court ordered Mr. Bannon to comply.
The Court of Appeals panel that issued this decision today found that it was bound by a 1961 decision called Licavoli which held that in the context of the congressional contempt statute "Willfully" doesn't require a belief that the conduct is wrong; rather all that matters is whether a subpoena was issued and the recipient complied with it.
E. It also troubling that the Court endorsed the holding in this case that Mr. Bannon could not raise challenges to the multiple violations of the Rules of the House of Representatives from the formation of the 1/6 Committee through its decision to hold Mr. Bannon in contempt.
The DOJ asked the court to decline to consider the violations and the court agreed.
There are additional issues of constitutional dimension that were raised on appeal that we will also ask the En Banc Court to consider based on their direct conflict with other authority from this Court and the United States Supreme Court.
https://warroom.org/stephen-k-bannons-attorney-statement-regarding-court-of-appeals-decision/
No comments:
Post a Comment