Democrats keep promising contempt referrals against this Administration's officials come January. Here's what actually happens to one, and why the Navarro case matters more than people realize. Under the contempt statute, the referral goes to the U.S. Attorney for D.C. In practice, DOJ has treated prosecuting it as a discretionary decision, not a ministerial act. In 2012 the House held Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over Fast and Furious documents. DOJ declined to prosecute, taking the position that the statute can't be applied to an official asserting executive privilege at the President's direction. In 2022, DOJ declined to charge Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino. It charged Peter Navarro. That asymmetry is the problem. Whether a senior adviser faces prison shouldn't depend on which administration's DOJ receives the referral, or whose adviser he was. Yesterday I said a senior adviser who stands on privilege in good faith shouldn't face a criminal contempt prosecution. The Holder precedent says DOJ agrees, and Holder's team agrees, but only when it helps their side. That's why I filed in support of Navarro at the Supreme Court, and why Licavoli needs to go. If the Court settles the rule now, before the subpoena tsunami, the next fights over Stephen Miller or anyone else go where the Constitution sends them: negotiation and accommodation, and if that fails, a civil case. Not a grand jury.
— Jeff Clark (@JeffClarkUS) November 10, 2026
Democrats keep promising contempt referrals against this Administration's officials come January. Here's what actually happens to one, and why the Navarro case matters more than people realize.
Under the contempt statute, the referral goes to the U.S. Attorney for D.C. In practice, DOJ has treated prosecuting it as a discretionary decision, not a ministerial act.
In 2012 the House held Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over Fast and Furious documents. DOJ declined to prosecute, taking the position that the statute can't be applied to an official asserting executive privilege at the President's direction. In 2022, DOJ declined to charge Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino. It charged Peter Navarro.
That asymmetry is the problem. Whether a senior adviser faces prison shouldn't depend on which administration's DOJ receives the referral, or whose adviser he was. Yesterday I said a senior adviser who stands on privilege in good faith shouldn't face a criminal contempt prosecution. The Holder precedent says DOJ agrees, and Holder's team agrees, but only when it helps their side.
That's why I filed in support of Navarro at the Supreme Court, and why Licavoli needs to go. If the Court settles the rule now, before the subpoena tsunami, the next fights over Stephen Miller or anyone else go where the Constitution sends them: negotiation and accommodation, and if that fails, a civil case. Not a grand jury.
Replies