=Criminal referrals of former Trump officials pose thorny questions for DOJ ==

Tough decisions are piling up at the Department of Justice (DOJ), which is now weighing three criminal referrals from Congress directed at former Trump White House officials.

The referrals pose thorny legal issues for a department that has historically defended senior administration officials’ testimonial immunity in the face of congressional subpoenas.

This week, the House voted to hold Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino in contempt for defying the Jan. 6 committee’s subpoenas as the panel grows increasingly frustrated over the nearly four months that have passed since it approved a referral for former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

When the House voted to refer Stephen Bannon to the DOJ last year for defying another select committee subpoena, federal prosecutors quickly brought criminal contempt of Congress charges against the Trump confidant and former White House strategist.

But the referrals involving Meadows, Navarro and Scavino may involve tougher considerations for the Justice Department since their subpoenas cover their work as White House officials.

Neil Eggleston, a former White House counsel and congressional investigator for the House’s Iran-Contra probe, said the remaining cases are more difficult than that of Bannon, who was well out of the White House during the time period in question.

“For people who were senior White House officials at the time, there’s another layer of complexity that doesn’t apply to a Bannon,” he said.

The DOJ has historically argued in favor of shielding such officials from congressional inquiry, adopting legal positions that the legislative branch has no avenue to compel testimony from presidential advisers.

“For a few decades now, we’ve seen DOJ articulating this kind of absolutist stance that close advisors to the president are absolutely immune from congressional subpoena,” said David Janovsky, an analyst with the nonpartisan Project on Government Oversight.

“And it’s worth noting that DOJ has basically invented this out of whole cloth, and it’s certainly not something that Congress agrees with, and it’s not really something that any of the judges who have had an occasion to look at this argument have agreed with either. So they’re pretty much on their own on it, but that’s the line they’ve taken in the past,” he added.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3262936-criminal-referrals-of-former-trump-officials-pose-thorny-questions-for-doj/