No Sympathy for Steve Bannon

Mr. Bannon will remain free while his case is on appeal, but if Congressional oversight by either party is going to mean anything, then potential witnesses can’t be permitted to flout lawful subpoenas with impunity. Those who don’t want to answer Congress’s questions can show up, cite the Fifth Amendment, and decline to reply. That’s what other allies of President Trump did before the Jan. 6 committee. But witnesses still have to appear.

After Mr. Bannon refused, the House voted to recommend that he be charged with contempt of Congress. The Justice Department indicted him, and then a jury convicted him. This is such a clear-cut case that his punishment might be useful discipline.

“Others must be deterred from committing similar crimes,” said federal Judge

Carl Nichols,

who was appointed by Mr. Trump. Yet making this prosecution a precedent requires following it when the shoe is on the other foot.

If critics see the case against Mr. Bannon as an example of politicized law enforcement, one reason is that the Justice Department has a history of refusing to pursue contempt referrals by a GOP Congress. In 2013, when Republicans were investigating IRS targeting of Tea Party groups, the House called

Lois Lerner,

who at the time was head of the agency’s Exempt Organizations office. Ms. Lerner came to the hearing, defended herself with an opening statement, and then took the Fifth and refused to answer questions.

In 2014 the House voted to hold Ms. Lerner in contempt, arguing that when she spoke out, she effectively waived her right to remain silent. Eleven months went by. Then the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia informed the House that, in his view, Ms. Lerner had made only “general claims of innocence” that did not affect her Fifth Amendment rights. He therefore decided to shield Ms. Lerner from a grand jury.

That’s why it’s good to see the Justice Department vindicate Congress’s contempt power with Mr. Bannon. By the way, these examples are distinct from cases that involve high-ranking presidential advisers. The House also recently recommended contempt charges against former White House chief of staff

Mark Meadows,

who declined to testify to the Jan. 6 inquiry. The Justice Department has declined to pursue that, which is appropriate given the separation of powers concerns that would be inherent if Congress deposed the President’s top aide.

Mr. Bannon’s problem is he’d been out of the White House for more than three years by the time of the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 riot. If he were still immune from subpoena, Congress’s oversight power would be vanishingly weak.