The Supreme Court may act as soon as Monday on Steve Bannon’s petition seeking review of an appellate ruling that affirmed his contempt conviction related to Jan. 6. The Justice Department initially waived a response but later asked the Court to vacate the appeals ruling so the government can seek dismissal in the trial court, citing prosecutorial discretion and pointing to recent FIFA-related precedents. If the Court follows the same approach it used in the FIFA cases, the appeals court decision could be set aside when the order list is published.
Supreme Court May Clear Path to Dismiss Steve Bannon Case — Order List Due Monday
The Supreme Court wrapped up its most recent two-week argument period after sessions that included an unusual panel on gun rights for people who use illegal drugs. During the term the Court’s GOP-appointed supermajority issued rulings that affected a range of issues, from a New York congressional contest to challenges over California school transgender policies and limits on prisoners’ ability to file certain constitutional claims.
Attention now turns to a potentially consequential development for Steve Bannon. The Court is scheduled to release an order list on Monday, and among the petitions awaiting action is Bannon’s request—filed last fall—for review of an appellate decision that affirmed his contempt conviction for refusing to comply with the House Jan. 6 committee.
Bannon’s appeal has taken an unusual procedural path. The Department of Justice (DOJ) initially waived its right to respond to his petition, which ordinarily would prompt the Court to deny review and leave the lower-court ruling intact. After the Court requested a response, however, the DOJ reversed course: rather than opposing review, the department asked the justices to vacate the appellate decision so the government can seek dismissal of the entire prosecution in the trial court.
The administration did not offer a detailed public explanation for the change in posture, saying only that it “has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice.” In its filing the DOJ pointed to recent precedents from FIFA-related corruption prosecutions in which the government obtained similar relief from the high court.
Steve Bannon, former advisor to US President Donald Trump, attends a pre-trial conference hearing where he entered a guilty plea in his fraud case stemming from a fundraising effort to build a border wall, at New York Criminal Court in Manhattan on February 11, 2025. Bannon, 71, entered a guilty plea to New York state charges as part of an agreement that spared him prison time. (Photo by Steven HIRSCH / POOL / AFP) (Photo by STEVEN HIRSCH/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)(Steven Hirsch / Pool / AFP via Getty Images)
What vacating the appellate ruling would mean: If the Court vacates the appeals court decision, it would remove that precedent and allow the government to ask the trial court to dismiss the case. That sequence does not guarantee dismissal by the trial court, but it would erase the appellate ruling that currently supports the conviction.
In the FIFA matters the justices granted the government’s pro-defendant requests on the order list when the petitions were first considered at conference. That precedent does not assure identical treatment for Bannon, nor does it fix timing. But if the Court follows the same playbook, the appeals-court decision upholding Bannon’s contempt conviction could be undone when the order list is published on Monday morning.
Next steps: Watch the Supreme Court’s order list on Monday for any action on Bannon’s petition. If the Court vacates the appellate ruling, the case will return to the trial court where the DOJ can move to dismiss.
If you have questions or comments for the Deadline: Legal Newsletter, submit them through the publication’s form for a chance to be featured.
Originally published on MS NOW.
Help us improve.
