Tag: judge

  • Hochul faces tough choices on her rejected chief judge pick. None are good for her.

    Hochul faces tough choices on her rejected chief judge pick. None are good for her.

    [ad_1]

    “You’re jumping ahead in your own analysis,” Hochul said after an unrelated event in Albany. “You’re making an assumption that I have not stated to be factual that we’re going down a certain path. I recommend you don’t do that because you will all know everything you need to know in due process and due time.”

    But as time ticks, Hochul appears to be facing a likely losing battle against progressives and unions who quashed LaSalle’s potential ascension as the state’s first Latino chief judge. Opponents said he issued some decisions as a judge that were anti-labor and anti-abortion. LaSalle said that’s not true.

    After the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected her pick, Hochul argued that LaSalle needed a full vote in the 63-member Senate. Senators have said no: The Judiciary Committee’s vote is where the issue ends.

    Legal experts are split on whether Hochul would win a lawsuit over the matter.

    Jerry Goldfeder, a preeminent Democratic election lawyer, wrote Monday that the state constitution indicates a governor’s nominee for the Court of Appeals needs a Senate vote, saying it “requires advice and consent by ‘the Senate,’ not one of its committees.”

    Others have suggested “advice and consent” can end with the committee.

    Even a successful lawsuit to bring LaSalle’s nomination to the floor would put Hochul back in the same place: She is not expected to have enough votes among Senate Democrats to confirm him, meaning he would simply be rejected again.

    Hochul wouldn’t indulge that scenario.

    “As the governor, it is my prerogative to do what’s best for the people of the state of New York after a thoughtful analysis and in consultation — and I assure you, that is my guiding star,” she said.

    Sen. Jamaal Bailey was the only Democrat on the Judiciary Committee who voted to move LaSalle’s nomination without recommendation — meaning he was willing to have it come to the floor, but also didn’t vote in favor of him. Bailey said he remains “comfortable” with his vote, but did not weigh in on what the future holds.

    “The committee decided what it decided. I think that ultimately the next decisions need to be determined by the governor and the leadership about what takes place,” Bailey, a Bronx Democrat, said.

    LaSalle’s supporters, including former chief judge Jonathan Lippman, have made several arguments challenging the legitimacy of the committee decision, including asserting that the formal letter of rejection from Senate Democrats signed by Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins should have been signed by Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, who is the Senate president, per the constitution.

    Stewart-Cousins dismissed that argument, along with the notion LaSalle deserved additional Senate consideration following his five-hour hearing last Wednesday.

    “I’m not arguing about who signed the letter or not,” she told reporters Tuesday. “What happened was that there were not enough votes to bring the nominee to the floor. So therefore the nominee did not go through.”

    Stewart-Cousins said she was “not concerned” a stand off over a potential lawsuit would derail coming budget negotiations between the governor and Legislature, saying both parties have shown they “continue to interact on a professional level.”

    “I have a good relationship with the governor,” she said. “We all do. So we can disagree, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do the work that people sent us to do.”

    But asked whether she’d talked to Hochul personally since LaSalle’s rejection and its fallout, Stewart-Cousins said she has not.

    There are other options for Hochul.

    She could simply withdraw LaSalle’s nomination and pick from among the other six candidates recommended by the state Commission on Judicial Nomination — giving her a new shot at winning Senate approval after a number of lawmakers indicated support for a few others on the list.

    Or the Court of Appeals could rule it doesn’t have a chief judge and ask the commission to go through a monthslong process of selecting new candidates for Hochul to consider. Right now, the court has six members, which for a prolonged period could hurt its ability to reach consensus.

    Again, Hochul dismissed the turmoil and stuck by LaSalle: “I chose the best person from the list of seven.”

    [ad_2]
    #Hochul #faces #tough #choices #rejected #chief #judge #pick #good
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Centre’s intervention in judiciary a danger: Former Karnataka SC judge

    Centre’s intervention in judiciary a danger: Former Karnataka SC judge

    [ad_1]

    Mysuru: Former Karnataka Lokayukta and Supreme Court judge, Justice N. Santhosh Hegde (retd) on Tuesday termed the Union government’s intervention in the appointment of judges and in the judicial system incorrect and “dangerous”.

    At an interaction programme with media, he underlined that the executive should not intervene with the judiciary. “This kind of intervention is a dangerous development,” he warned.

    “The politicians will not have any knowledge about the judiciary. If this is the case, it is not tenable to intervene in the appointment of judges or in the matters of judiciary,” Hegde said.

    “I didn’t know much about the society before becoming Lokayukta. Those who become rich will get all the respect. Those who come out of jail are received with grand welcome,” he said.

    Hegde further said that there is danger of the country getting divided on the lines of religion and language. However, one can’t say when it is going to happen, he added.

    “Corruption is rampant in the country. The representatives of the people are having the feeling of being owners of the people. The politicians are just talking about corruption and making allegations against each other. No one wants to correct it,” he said.

    If this situation continues, people will rebel against the system, he said, but added that he wouldn’t know when this situation will come.

    “I got many awards, recognitions. I have donated money to organisations. I have not accepted money from anyone. I own an apartment and nothing else. We have to be clean,” he said.

    Hedge also said that the delay in disposal of cases should not happen, but society is getting a different message as mediators are being approached for solutions.

    [ad_2]
    #Centres #intervention #judiciary #danger #Karnataka #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Cow dung homes proven to shield against nuclear radiation: Tapi district court judge

    Cow dung homes proven to shield against nuclear radiation: Tapi district court judge

    [ad_1]

    Vyara: The Tapi district court’s additional sessions judge Samir Vinod Chandra Vyas while awarding punishment in a cows and bulls illegal transportation case observed that “Science has proved that houses made of cow dung can protect from nuclear radiation.”

    Vyas in the order in the State Vs Mohammad Amin Anjum case, accounted for the benefits of cows. The judge pointed out that many incurable diseases can be cured by drinking cow urine. “Tridev is not different from the cow, religion is born from the cow, in today’s time organic farming is becoming popular in place of chemical fertilizer based farming, and organic farming can be done only with cow dung. Crops grown organically also protect human beings from many diseases,” he said.

    He noted: “In the present time, there is a huge need for cows, when cattle are illegally transported and slaughtered, which is painful. Cows are slaughtered using electric machines, so cows are in danger, non-vegetarians are eating cow meat.”

    The accused was found guilty of illegally transporting cattle and was awarded life term for transporting 6936 cows and 16 bulls. The order was pronounced on November 4, 2022.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Cow #dung #homes #proven #shield #nuclear #radiation #Tapi #district #court #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Cow dung homes proven to shield against nuclear radiation: Gujarat court judge

    Cow dung homes proven to shield against nuclear radiation: Gujarat court judge

    [ad_1]

    Vyara: The Tapi district court’s additional sessions judge Samir Vinod Chandra Vyas while awarding punishment in a cows and bulls illegal transportation case observed that “Science has proved that houses made of cow dung can protect from nuclear radiation.”

    Vyas in the order in the State Vs Mohammad Amin Anjum case, accounted for the benefits of cows. The judge pointed out that many incurable diseases can be cured by drinking cow urine. “Tridev is not different from the cow, religion is born from the cow, in today’s time organic farming is becoming popular in place of chemical fertilizer based farming, and organic farming can be done only with cow dung. Crops grown organically also protect human beings from many diseases,” he said.

    He noted: “In the present time, there is a huge need for cows, when cattle are illegally transported and slaughtered, which is painful. Cows are slaughtered using electric machines, so cows are in danger, non-vegetarians are eating cow meat.”

    The accused was found guilty of illegally transporting cattle and was awarded life term for transporting 6936 cows and 16 bulls. The order was pronounced on November 4, 2022.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Cow #dung #homes #proven #shield #nuclear #radiation #Gujarat #court #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Abolishing cow slaughter is the cure for climate change, claims Gujarat judge

    Abolishing cow slaughter is the cure for climate change, claims Gujarat judge

    [ad_1]

    A Gujarat district court observed and claimed that abolishing cow slaughter is the ‘cure for all problems, including climate change.

    “All the problems of the earth will be solved if cow slaughter is stopped,” principal district judge Samir Vinodchandra Vyas of Tapi district court made these observations while sentencing a man for life imprisonment with regards to illegally transporting 16 cows.

    The man was arrested in August. Besides the life sentence, he was also fined Rs 5 lakh.

    “The problems that exist today are because of the increase of the irascibility and hot temper. The only reason for the increase is the slaughter of cows. Till this is completely prohibited the saatvik climate change cannot have its effect,” Justice Vyas said.

    The judge did not stop there. He claimed that according to science, houses made of cow dung are not affected by atomic radiation.

    “The use of gaumutra (cow urine) is a cure for many incurable diseases,” Vyas claimed.

    According to Bar ad Bench, the incident happened in November last year. Vyas says that he is disappointed there are fewer debates and discussions on the benefits of cow protection.

    “Cow is not only an animal but a mother. A cow is the living planet of 68 crore holy places and 33 crore gods. The obligation of a cow on the entire universe defies description,” Justice Vyas claimed.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Abolishing #cow #slaughter #cure #climate #change #claims #Gujarat #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Abolishing cow slaughter is the cure for climate change, says Gujarat judge

    Abolishing cow slaughter is the cure for climate change, says Gujarat judge

    [ad_1]

    A Gujarat district court said that abolishing cow slaughter is the ‘cure for all problems, including climate change.

    “All the problems of the earth will be solved if cow slaughter is stopped,” principal district judge Samir Vinodchandra Vyas of Tapi district court made these observations while sentencing a man for life imprisonment with regards to illegally transporting 16 cows.

    The man was arrested in August last year. Besides the life sentence, he was also fined Rs 5 lakh.

    “The problems that exist today are because of the increase of the irascibility and hot temper. The only reason for the increase is the slaughter of cows. Till this is completely prohibited the saatvik climate change cannot have its effect,” Justice Vyas said.

    The judge did not stop there. He said that according to science, houses made of cow dung are not affected by atomic radiation.

    “The use of gaumutra (cow urine) is a cure for many incurable diseases,” Vyas said.

    According to Bar ad Bench, the incident happened in November last year. Vyas says that he is disappointed there are fewer debates and discussions on the benefits of cow protection.

    “Cow is not only an animal but a mother. A cow is the living planet of 68 crore holy places and 33 crore gods. The obligation of a cow on the entire universe defies description,” Justice Vyas said.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Abolishing #cow #slaughter #cure #climate #change #Gujarat #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Judge rules DeSantis’ ouster of prosecutor was unconstitutional but upholds suspension

    Judge rules DeSantis’ ouster of prosecutor was unconstitutional but upholds suspension

    [ad_1]

    prosecutor suspended florida 67424

    Hinkle rejected DeSantis’ argument.

    “Florida Governor Ron DeSantis suspended elected State Attorney Andrew H. Warren, ostensibly on the ground that Mr. Warren had blanket policies not to prosecute certain kinds of cases,” read the order. “The allegation was false.”

    Hinkle said Warren’s office had a policy of using “prosecutorial discretion” in all cases, including those involving abortion.

    “Any reasonable investigation would have confirmed this,” Hinkle wrote.

    The judge conceded, though, that he didn’t have the authority to reinstate Warren to his position.

    DeSantis’ office hailed the ruling was a victory, focusing primarily on Hinkle upholding Warren’s suspension.

    “Today, Judge Hinkle upheld @GovRonDeSantis’ decision to suspend Andrew Warren from office for neglect of duty and incompetence,” DeSantis’ Communications Director Taryn Fenske said.

    DeSantis replaced Warren with Susan Lopez, who previously served as a judge in the Tampa area.

    During a brief press conference Friday after the ruling, Warren declined to say what his next move would be but told reporters “this is not over.”

    He said the governor should now rescind his suspension and let him return to office.

    “Let’s see if the governor actually believes in the rule of law. … let’s see what kind of man the governor actually is,” Warren said.

    DeSantis began eyeing Warren after the governor in late 2021 asked his public safety czar, Larry Keefe, to see whether Florida had any “reform prosecutors,” a term generally associated with progressive prosecutors who pursue criminal justice reforms. When he ran for Hillsborough state attorney, Warren vowed to reduce recidivism, among other things.

    “Mr. Keefe made some calls to acquaintances and quickly identified Mr. Warren as the Florida prosecutor who had taken the mantle of a reform prosecutor,” read Hinkle’s opinion.

    In his ruling, Hinkle also highlighted testimony from Fenske centered on how the communications office handled the announcement that DeSantis was suspending Warren. The night before DeSantis held the Aug. 4 high-profile press conference to suspend Warren through executive order, former administration press secretary Christina Pushaw tweeted: “Get some rest tonight” and “[p]repare for the liberal media meltdown of the year.”

    During trial, Fenske testified that Pushaw was admonished for the tweets, but Hinkle says he “does not credit” the testimony because Pushaw was tweeting about the suspension again the next day.

    “Ms. Pushaw tweeted an equally partisan, unprofessional message about this the next night, after purportedly being admonished,” he wrote. “And in any event, any admonishment was about tone, not substance.”

    As justification for the suspension, DeSantis’ legal team also brought up former GOP Gov. Rick Scott’s 2017 decision to reassign death penalty-eligible cases from Aramis Ayala, the former state attorney for Orange and Osceola counties, after she said she would never pursue the death penalty even in cases that “absolutely deserve the death penalty.”

    In his ruling, Hinkle noted no one ever suggested removing Ayala from office, and that Warren never made similar statements.

    “Quite the contrary,” Hinkle wrote. “[Warren] said repeatedly that discretion would be exercised at every state of the case.”

    The issue now could go before the Florida Senate, which is responsible for removing from office officials who have been suspended by the governor.

    The issue is currently on hold in the Senate until the legal proceedings are resolved, including any potential appeals.

    Senate President Kathleen Passidomo (R-Naples) sent a memo to her members Friday morning after the Hinkle ruling telling them the issue isn’t completed.

    “As such, the matter of Mr. Warren’s reinstatement or removal from office by the Florida Senate appellate remedies have been exhausted,” she wrote.

    Gary Fineout contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #rules #DeSantis #ouster #prosecutor #unconstitutional #upholds #suspension
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • After Senate flex on Hochul judge pick, a budget battle looms

    After Senate flex on Hochul judge pick, a budget battle looms

    [ad_1]

    And it came off to many as a clear, though not irreparable, miscalculation that was an embarrassing loss to start her term and one that could weaken the moderate governor’s standing at the state Capitol with an emboldened Legislature that has increasingly moved to the left.

    How both sides react next could set the tone for the next six months as the governor and Democrats in the Senate and Assembly negotiate a $220 billion state budget. After narrowly winning election last year, she’s also looking at proposals to reinvigorate New York City and the state with a massive housing plan and make further changes to the state’s controversial bail laws.

    “Governing is about compromise, but it’s also about understanding when you have leverage, how you use it, and never forfeiting it needlessly, which is what she’s appeared to do in the last few weeks,” said Bob Bellafiore, an Albany-based communications consultant and a former press secretary for Republican Gov. George Pataki.

    For example, a bargaining chip could have been to refuse to sign off on lawmakers’ pay raise in December until they could assure LaSalle would be approved, but she approved the raise and didn’t appear to offer any other enticement to get him over the finish line, two people close to the Senate and familiar with the negotiations said.

    Hochul also erred by not lining up support early for LaSalle, who would have been the first Latino chief judge, or perhaps pulling the nomination when it was likely to fail. Instead, she set herself up for defeat by trying to force it through the Senate when powerful unions — including CWA and the AFL-CIO — had already opposed him because they viewed a few of his court decisions as anti-abortion and anti-labor, which he refuted.

    “There was a lot of energy around this,” Sharon Cromwell, deputy state director for the Working Families Party, which opposed the nomination, said Thursday. “We understood the stakes of what it means to have a chief judge that has a track record of not standing with unions and working people — and a track record to make some anti-abortion decisions.”

    How does Hochul respond after the loss? She didn’t rule out a lawsuit to try to force a full Senate vote, but also vowed not to let it derail her agenda.

    “I did not say what course we’re taking,” Hochul told reporters Thursday. “I just said we’re weighing all of our options. But I put forth an ambitious plan for the people of New York. And I believe that there’s a lot of common interest between the executive and the legislative branch.”

    Senators who opposed LaSalle early on framed the historic rejection as the right and responsibility of the Senate, perhaps a nod to confirmations with governors past that have been nothing more than a rubber stamp, including the last one, Janet DiFiore in 2016 who was widely panned for her leadership and left under an ethics cloud last summer.

    LaSalle’s rejection is the first for a New York governor under the current nomination system that dates to the 1970s.

    “The Senate has now set a new standard in thorough, detailed hearings — an achievement for our democracy and a harbinger of future proceedings,” Deputy Senate Majority Leader Mike Gianaris said in a statement. LaSalle didn’t fit the wish list for a new chief judge that he and his colleagues had sent to the nominating commission months earlier, he said.

    Bronx Democrat Sen. Gustavo Rivera said in a statement he hoped everyone could move forward in round two. Hochul would have to select from a new list of candidates from the Commission on Judicial Nomination.

    “It is unfortunate that this process has become so acrimonious, and I implore the governor to work collaboratively with the Senate so that we may approve the nominee she selects next,” he said.

    While the state Constitution says a judge to the Court of Appeals nominated by a governor has to be confirmed with the “advice and consent” of the Senate, it’s not explicit about whether the committee membership adequately represents the chamber. Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins says it does. Hochul says it does not.

    Richard Briffault, a Columbia Law School professor who specializes in constitutional law, said it is unclear whether Hochul would win a lawsuit to force a full Senate vote.

    “The Constitution speaks about the Senate taking up the matter, but it doesn’t say what it means ‘by the Senate,’ and another provision of the constitution says the Senate can determine its own rules or proceeding,” Briffault said.

    Former Gov. David Paterson — a Hochul supporter who is also a former Senate minority leader — said he would have expected senators to bring the matter to a full Senate vote as Hochul wished as a way to avoid any legal uncertainty. The nomination was likely to fail on the Senate floor anyway — and would still if Hochul were to win a lawsuit.

    But Paterson noted that leaders in Albany have long memories.

    “It was a bad day for the governor,” Paterson said, but added, “The governor has four more years of days to establish who she is. Sooner or later, you know what they say: What goes around comes around. They are going to need her for something, and they are going to find out.”

    The former executive doesn’t see Hochul’s adherence to her pick as an error.

    “She picked a candidate that she knew they didn’t like. But she’s not supposed to be political here,” he said. “She’s supposed to be picking who she thinks would be the best judge at this time.”

    In the aftermath of the hearing, several senators said that despite the clash, they could easily maintain a working relationship with Hochul, who came into office after years of adversarial relations between the Legislature and her predecessor, Andrew Cuomo.

    She agreed. When asked Thursday if the LaSalle denial — and a potential legal battle — would hurt her housing, mental health and public safety priorities in the budget this year, she responded: “Nothing like this could detract from that.”

    [ad_2]
    #Senate #flex #Hochul #judge #pick #budget #battle #looms
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Judge sanctions Trump, Habba nearly $1 million for ‘completely frivolous’ Clinton suit

    Judge sanctions Trump, Habba nearly $1 million for ‘completely frivolous’ Clinton suit

    [ad_1]

    The judge ordered Trump and Habba to pay $938,000 to cover the legal costs for the 31 defendants Trump linked in his year-old lawsuit. It’s the second time Middlebrooks has sanctioned Habba in the Clinton lawsuit. The first time was a $50,000 order sought by a single defendant, Charles Dolan. The new round of sanctions was sought by the remaining defendants.

    In the new order, Hillary Clinton got the biggest award of fees for a single defendant: almost $172,000.

    It’s the latest legal setback for Trump, who continues to face peril in advancing criminal probes and civil lawsuits related to his effort to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of sensitive national security records at his Mar-a-Lago estate after leaving office.

    Middlebrooks’ ruling included a point-by-point recitation of the flaws in Trump’s initial lawsuit, noting that it often misstated, distorted or cherrypicked from key documents he claimed supported allegations of a grand conspiracy between Clinton and the Justice Department to target Trump for criminal prosecution.

    “The Amended Complaint is a hodgepodge of disconnected, often immaterial events, followed by an implausible conclusion. This is a deliberate attempt to harass; to tell a story without regard to facts,” Middlebrooks, an appointee of former president Bill Clinton, wrote.

    He specifically cited Trump’s claim that Clinton conspired with former FBI Director James Comey to seek a Trump prosecution — one that Middlebrooks noted never occurred — as “categorically absurd.” He also noted that Trump and Habba repeatedly mischaracterized the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. They also cited Russian intelligence — shared by then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe with Sen. Lindsey Graham — as a basis for one of their claims, without noting that it was Russian intelligence and that Ratcliffe said it was unverified.

    “Mr. Trump’s lawyers saw no professional impediment or irony in relying upon Russian intelligence as the good faith basis for their allegation,” Middlebrooks wrote.

    In his order, Middlebrooks cited Habba’s attacks on him in a Fox News interview, which he said continued to distort the facts of the case and make baseless allegations of improprieties by federal judges and magistrates. He also recounted a litany of other cases filed by Trump and his attorneys that bore similar hallmarks of frivolity.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #sanctions #Trump #Habba #million #completely #frivolous #Clinton #suit
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Judge denies Navarro effort to dismiss contempt case for defying Jan. 6 committee

    Judge denies Navarro effort to dismiss contempt case for defying Jan. 6 committee

    [ad_1]

    “Defendant has failed to come forward with any evidence to support the claimed assertion of privilege. And, because the claimed assertion of executive privilege is unproven, Defendant cannot avoid prosecution for contempt,” Mehta wrote in the 39-page ruling.

    It’s a significant decision in an area with little precedent: what current and former presidents must do to assert executive privilege. Mehta acknowledged that there’s not much to guide how courts should determine when a proper assertion has been made. But he said limited court rulings on the subject suggest there must be at least some formal evidence it occurred.

    Mehta noted that two other Trump aides whom the House sought to hold in contempt — Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino — produced letters from Trump ordering them to assert executive privilege on his behalf. The Justice Department declined to prosecute the men, and Mehta indicated that the absence of a similar letter from Trump to Navarro led to a reasonable conclusion that Trump had not asserted executive privilege over his testimony.

    Mehta’s ruling means that Navarro’s trial on two charges of contempt of Congress is likely to commence later this month. He faces a maximum sentence of a year in prison on each charge — one for refusing to testify and the other for refusing to provide documents — if convicted.

    The select committee had hoped to interview Navarro about his coordination with former Trump adviser Bannon and efforts to strategize with members of Congress seeking to challenge the 2020 election results on Jan. 6, 2021, during the counting of Electoral College ballots. The committee recommended that Navarro be held in contempt in April 2022, and the full House quickly followed suit. The Justice Department charged him in June.

    Mehta’s ruling also gutted a series of defenses Navarro had hoped to raise at his trial, including that he had a “good-faith belief” that he was immune from the committee’s subpoena. Mehta also agreed to prohibit Navarro from arguing that the select committee’s subpoena was invalid because the panel didn’t have a full complement of 13 members or a ranking Republican member appointed by GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy.

    Although he declined to say whether the committee was operating improperly, Mehta noted that Supreme Court precedent required Navarro to first raise his rules complaint with Congress itself. Because he didn’t do that, he effectively waived that argument. Navarro had argued that raising his complaints to Congress would have been “futile” because the House would have simply rejected them. But Mehta said the rules were clear.

    “Neither the Supreme Court nor the D.C. Circuit has recognized a futility exception. … And, given the rationale of the rule, it is doubtful that higher courts would recognize one,” Mehta wrote.

    The ruling essentially puts Navarro on a track similar to his close ally Bannon, who was tried and convicted of contempt of Congress in July. Bannon, like Navarro, had hoped to argue that he believed he was immune from testifying and that longstanding Justice Department precedents precluded Congress from subpoenaing advisers to former presidents. But in that case, U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols relied on a decades-old appeals court ruling — United States v. Licavoli — to reject Bannon’s proposed defenses, ruling that prosecutors simply needed to show that Bannon deliberately refused to appear before Congress.

    Mehta cited the case, as well, in tossing most of Navarro’s defenses.

    “Defendant apparently believes the law applies differently to him,” he wrote of Navarro. “Because he is a former aide to the President of the United States, he contends, a more stringent state-of-mind standard applies, meaning that the government must be held to a higher burden of proof to convict him as opposed to the average person.”

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #denies #Navarro #effort #dismiss #contempt #case #defying #Jan #committee
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )