WASHINGTON—A federal jury in Washington has convicted former Trump aide Peter Navarro of two misdemeanor counts of contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena.
The jury verdict in federal court came late in the afternoon of Sept. 7 after a few hours of deliberation. The trial began with jury selection on Sept. 5.
Mr. Navarro, who was then-President Donald Trump’s White House trade adviser, didn’t appear to react when the verdict was read.
Citing the presence of protesters outside the courthouse, Mr. Navarro’s attorney, Stanley Woodward of Brand Woodward Law in Washington, promptly moved for a mistrial before Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2014.
A protester was “accosting” his client, Mr. Woodward told the judge.
The judge didn’t rule on the mistrial motion before the court was adjourned.
Protesters, both for and against Mr. Navarro, were present outside the courthouse after the verdict was delivered.
Mr. Navarro and his legal team held an impromptu press conference outside the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse, during which protesters repeatedly heckled the speakers.
“This is a sad day for America, not because they were guilty verdicts—because I can’t come out and have an honest, decent conversation with the people of America,” Mr. Navarro said.
“People of America, I want you to understand that this is the problem we have right here, this kind of divide in our country between the ‘woke,’ Marxist left and everybody else here, and this is nuts.”
“This is a landmark case that’s bound for the Supreme Court,” he said. “It’s about the constitutional separation of powers that goes back to the days of George Washington when the legislative branch first began to try to meddle with the executive branch.”
“There are very good reasons why executive privilege is sacrosanct. It’s the mechanism by which effective presidential decision-making is made. So this case is not about me,” Mr. Navarro said.
One of his lawyers, John Rowley, also said this was “a landmark case” and added that it “won’t be decided here finally—it will be decided by the D.C. Court of Appeals.”
