Steve Bannon gets an unusual assist from Trump’s Justice Department

In its latest affront to the rule of law, President Trump’s Department of Justice on Feb. 9 asked a federal judge to dismiss the indictment against Trump crony Steve Bannon for contempt of Congress — even though Bannon was charged more than four years ago and already completed a four-month prison sentence.

As The New York Times explained, “dismissal of the indictment against him would effectively wipe out the conviction.” 

To dismiss an indictment after a prison sentence has already been served is virtually unprecedented and shows the lengths to which the administration will go to whitewash history and rewrite the past. The judge, Trump appointee Carl Nichols, would be well advised to refuse.

It would appear Trump is trying to reward Bannon for refusing to testify in 2021 before the January 6 Select Committee of the House of Representatives.

Trump has said that the effort to compel Bannon to testify was part of a political vendetta carried out against him and an unconstitutional violation of executive privilege. The committee, the full House of Representatives, and numerous judges, however, were not convinced.

At the time the indictment was announced, Attorney General Merrick Garland said: “Since my first day in office, I have promised Justice Department employees that together we would show the American people by word and deed that the department adheres to the rule of law. … Today’s charges reflect the department’s steadfast commitment to these principles.”

But the rule of law has not been a hallmark of the Justice Department under Trump. The move to dismiss Bannon’s indictment is just another sign of its willingness to play fast and loose with facts and the law.

Bannon’s refusal to honor a congressional subpoena in 2021 was not the first time he had defied such a subpoena. In 2018, he refused to answer questions from the House Intelligence Committee, which was then investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. That time, with Trump in the White House, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives backed down. The second time, he was not so lucky.

Since his conviction, Bannon has called himself a “political prisoner.” On the day he entered prison, he said, “I have not only no regrets … I’m actually proud of what I did. I’d feel terrible if I didn’t do it. I don’t mind going to prison today.” 

When he was released in October 2024, just before the presidential election, Bannon proclaimed: “The four months in federal prison, not only did it not break me, it empowered me. I am more energized and more focused than I have ever been in my entire life.”

Bannon wasted no time taking up Trump’s cause. “Victory,” he said, “is at hand. … I’m very proud that The War Room (the podcast he founded) has had President Trump’s back.”

A year later, Bannon asked the Supreme Court to vacate his conviction. He argued that he had “relied in good faith on his attorney’s advice to delay compliance with a subpoena issued by a House Select Committee until executive privilege disputes were first resolved … [and] was advised that he was acting in accordance with the law.”  

Bannon also suggested that the subpoena he ignored was unlawful because “the committee that issued the subpoena here was never properly constituted.” If last month’s Justice Department request is granted, it would moot Bannon’s appeal.  

It is not unusual for prosecutors to seek dismissal of indictments or cases. For example, they may seek dismissal of an indictment if new evidence comes to light. But that is not an issue in the Bannon case. Dismissal after someone has served a sentence is extraordinarily rare. Previously unavailable evidence of innocence or a clear constitutional violation is nearly the only grounds for doing so.  

Again, none of that applies to Bannon.

Nonetheless, ignoring previous court rulings, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche contended that the decision to dismiss his indictment was “the result of an ‘improper’ House subpoena.” He added that “This department will continue to undo the prior administration’s weaponization of the justice system.”

Bannon had his day in court. He was tried and convicted. He appealed all the way to the Supreme Court and lost before going to prison.

The only thing that has changed is that his friends have returned to power. What the Justice Department is doing in the Bannon case is just the latest example of why, as former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich puts it, “’Trump justice’ is an oxymoron.” 

Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College.  

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

More Opinions - Judiciary News

Noem defends living on base in Coast Guard housing 

Ted Cruz, Tim Scott asking Treasury to approve $200B tax cut without ...

Watch live: Walz, Ellison testify before House on Minnesota fraud

Noem’s spending review has held up more than 1,000 FEMA contracts, grants and ...

Canadian PM Carney says US and Israel’s strikes on Iran mark ‘failure of ...

Talarico beats Crockett in Texas as GOP heads to runoff: Key takeaways

Live updates: Leavitt briefs reporters amid Iran attacks; Hegseth promises ...

Talarico beats Crockett in Texas Democratic Senate primary

The new SNAP food restrictions aren’t just confusing — they’re illegal

Hegseth, Caine preview major gravity-bombing campaign on Iran

Crockett concedes to Talarico, says Texas ‘primed to turn blue’

Kelly: Iran operation ‘not going well’ for Trump administration

Holladay wins Arkansas special election in key Democratic pickup

NATO shoots down Iranian missile headed toward Turkey’s airspace

GOP state lawmakers urge White House to halt efforts to block state AI laws

Live updates: Cornyn, Paxton move to runoff; Texas Supreme Court order ...

‘Breathtaking’: Independent senator deplores Rubio’s explanation for Iran ...

Noem fends off attacks from left and right in heated hearing: 5 takeaways

© The Hill