ADVERTISEMENT

Mark Meadows seeks to move Georgia case into federal court

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,442
58,937
113
Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows formally petitioned Tuesday to move the criminal racketeering case brought against him by an Atlanta-area prosecutor over alleged interference in Georgia’s 2020 election from state court into federal court.

Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.

The motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, argues that the charges filed by Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D) covers Meadows’s conduct while he was a federal official working as the top aide to then-President Donald Trump.

In the motion, Meadows’s attorneys cite a federal law known as the “removal statute,” which generally allows “any officer … of the United States” who is facing criminal prosecution in state court to move those proceedings to federal court if the case relates to actions that were part of the individual’s duties as a federal official.


ADVERTISING


“Mr. Meadows is entitled to remove this action to federal court because the charges against him plausibly give rise to a federal defense based on his role at all relevant times as the White House Chief of Staff to the President of the United States,” Meadows’ attorneys George Terwilliger and Joseph Englert wrote in the Tuesday motion.
A spokesman for Willis declined to comment.
The filing comes one day after a Fulton County grand jury signed off on a sweeping criminal indictment charging Trump and 18 allies, including Meadows, in a broad conspiracy to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss in Georgia.
Meadows, a former North Carolina congressman who served as Trump’s chief of staff in 2020, was indicted on two charges: violation of Georgia’s racketeering act and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.



Among other things, the indictment cited Meadows’ calls and emails to state officials in Georgia and other battleground states as Trump and his associates sought to undermine the legitimate election results. It also cites a surprise December 2020 visit Meadows made to an Atlanta-area facility where state election workers were auditing ballots and his role in arranging Trump’s phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R). In the call, Trump urged Raffensperger to “find” the votes necessary to overturn Biden’s victory in the state.

In the Tuesday filing, Meadows’ attorneys defended their client’s actions, writing that he was merely acting in his “official capacity” as Trump’s chief of staff.
“Nothing Mr. Meadows is alleged in the indictment to have done is criminal per se: arranging Oval Office meetings, contacting state officials on the President’s behalf, visiting a state government building, and setting up a phone call for the President,” Meadows’ attorneys wrote. “One would expect a Chief of Staff to the President of the United States to do these sorts of things.”



They said Meadows planned to file a motion to dismiss the charges at a later date.
Meadows’ petition to move the case to federal court was widely expected — with Trump and former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark expected to pursue similar legal motions. If approved, it would allow the case to be heard before a potentially friendlier jury pool made up of residents summoned from Northern Georgia, which is more conservative than heavily Democratic Fulton County.
Trump previously tried a similar legal maneuver in New York, where he’s facing state charges for falsifying business records to shield hush money payments to an adult film actress. A federal judge there rejected the effort and kept the matter in state court, saying the charges there did not involve Trump’s official duties as president.
The move in Georgia came as Atlanta awaited word of who among the 19 people charged in Monday’s indictment would be the first to surrender and post bond in the closely watched case. Willis gave those charged a deadline of noon on Aug. 25 to appear in Atlanta, where they will be fingerprinted and processed. An initial appearance before a judge could come then or in coming weeks.

 
I am no attorney so perhaps one of our esteemed barristers can enlighten me.

As Chief of Staff to the president his federal duties are focused on the functioning of our executive branch. On the flip side the alleged crimes were committed to help Trump the candidate, not Trump the president.

If he was calling Georgia officials about Covid outbreaks, infrastructure, hurricane relief or a myriad of other normal federal/state government interactions then I get it being a federal issue. But these calls were in support of a candidate for election and had nothing to do with the regular functioning of our government.

What am I missing? Is this just a Hail Mary?
 
I think we're at the point in the Georgia indictment of "every man/woman for themselves.

Obviously Meadows didn't rat anyone out yet. Otherwise I assume he would be an "unindicted co conspirator".

He gave up a elected position to be chief of staff for this?
LOL
Moran.
I wonder if he wants charges moved because it increases the chances of an eventual Presidential pardon. It appears the Georgia Gov is gonna be a hard ass here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I think we're at the point in the Georgia indictment of "every man/woman for themselves.

Obviously Meadows didn't rat anyone out yet. Otherwise I assume he would be an "unindicted co conspirator".

He gave up a elected position to be chief of staff for this?
LOL
Moran.
I wonder if he wants charges moved because it increases the chances of an eventual Presidential pardon. It appears the Georgia Gov is gonna be a hard ass here.

Moving the case to federal court does not make it pardonable. Georgia laws still apply.
 
Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows formally petitioned Tuesday to move the criminal racketeering case brought against him by an Atlanta-area prosecutor over alleged interference in Georgia’s 2020 election from state court into federal court.

Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.

The motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, argues that the charges filed by Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D) covers Meadows’s conduct while he was a federal official working as the top aide to then-President Donald Trump.

In the motion, Meadows’s attorneys cite a federal law known as the “removal statute,” which generally allows “any officer … of the United States” who is facing criminal prosecution in state court to move those proceedings to federal court if the case relates to actions that were part of the individual’s duties as a federal official.


ADVERTISING


“Mr. Meadows is entitled to remove this action to federal court because the charges against him plausibly give rise to a federal defense based on his role at all relevant times as the White House Chief of Staff to the President of the United States,” Meadows’ attorneys George Terwilliger and Joseph Englert wrote in the Tuesday motion.
A spokesman for Willis declined to comment.
The filing comes one day after a Fulton County grand jury signed off on a sweeping criminal indictment charging Trump and 18 allies, including Meadows, in a broad conspiracy to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss in Georgia.
Meadows, a former North Carolina congressman who served as Trump’s chief of staff in 2020, was indicted on two charges: violation of Georgia’s racketeering act and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.



Among other things, the indictment cited Meadows’ calls and emails to state officials in Georgia and other battleground states as Trump and his associates sought to undermine the legitimate election results. It also cites a surprise December 2020 visit Meadows made to an Atlanta-area facility where state election workers were auditing ballots and his role in arranging Trump’s phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R). In the call, Trump urged Raffensperger to “find” the votes necessary to overturn Biden’s victory in the state.

In the Tuesday filing, Meadows’ attorneys defended their client’s actions, writing that he was merely acting in his “official capacity” as Trump’s chief of staff.
“Nothing Mr. Meadows is alleged in the indictment to have done is criminal per se: arranging Oval Office meetings, contacting state officials on the President’s behalf, visiting a state government building, and setting up a phone call for the President,” Meadows’ attorneys wrote. “One would expect a Chief of Staff to the President of the United States to do these sorts of things.”



They said Meadows planned to file a motion to dismiss the charges at a later date.
Meadows’ petition to move the case to federal court was widely expected — with Trump and former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark expected to pursue similar legal motions. If approved, it would allow the case to be heard before a potentially friendlier jury pool made up of residents summoned from Northern Georgia, which is more conservative than heavily Democratic Fulton County.
Trump previously tried a similar legal maneuver in New York, where he’s facing state charges for falsifying business records to shield hush money payments to an adult film actress. A federal judge there rejected the effort and kept the matter in state court, saying the charges there did not involve Trump’s official duties as president.
The move in Georgia came as Atlanta awaited word of who among the 19 people charged in Monday’s indictment would be the first to surrender and post bond in the closely watched case. Willis gave those charged a deadline of noon on Aug. 25 to appear in Atlanta, where they will be fingerprinted and processed. An initial appearance before a judge could come then or in coming weeks.


"....an officer who acts out of any personal interest"✅
"malice"✅
"actual criminal intent"✅

 
Is it possible he’s trying to get it moved to Fed court because he cut an immunity deal with Jack Smith and therefore it could hold up? I wonder if that’s the case. I think he may have turned and the GA court is gonna screw that up for him.
 
Is it possible he’s trying to get it moved to Fed court because he cut an immunity deal with Jack Smith and therefore it could hold up? I wonder if that’s the case. I think he may have turned and the GA court is gonna screw that up for him.
If Meadows has an immunity agreement with Jack Smith then Willis would certainly be informed.

More likely that MM has provided valuable information to Smith via his DC grand jury testimony (Meadow’s attorney essentially said as much) and he gambled that he would avoid Georgia charges.

I doubt that Meadows wins removal to federal court in which case, I predict, he will spill everything and then some. The whole can of worms.
 
If Meadows has an immunity agreement with Jack Smith then Willis would certainly be informed.

More likely that MM has provided valuable information to Smith via his DC grand jury testimony (Meadow’s attorney essentially said as much) and he gambled that he would avoid Georgia charges.

I doubt that Meadows wins removal to federal court in which case, I predict, he will spill everything and then some. The whole can of worms.
A lot of the people indicted are certifiably insane. Eastman was jabbering about the 2020 election being stolen as he walked out of being processed today. He’ll gladly go down for/on Trump.
Meadows seems like a guy who has been desperately trying to triangulate himself out of trouble. Helping a little here, helping a little there, blustering somewhere else. But, his text messages show him to be rational. He doesn’t want to go to prison.
 
A lot of the people indicted are certifiably insane. Eastman was jabbering about the 2020 election being stolen as he walked out of being processed today. He’ll gladly go down for/on Trump.
Meadows seems like a guy who has been desperately trying to triangulate himself out of trouble. Helping a little here, helping a little there, blustering somewhere else. But, his text messages show him to be rational. He doesn’t want to go to prison.
Yep, that’s my impression also. I think Willis is going to squeeze him because she reads it the same way - he will do whatever is necessary to avoid the jumpsuit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Federal officer removal is a pretty obscure area of law that is not well understood by frankly anybody. As relevant here, it gives defendants who are federal officers the right to remove the case to federal court if the prosecution is "for or relating to any act under color of such office." Courts have offered varying interpretations of that phrase, and I don't believe SCOTUS has weighed in a way that definitively interprets the current statute. Of note, it used to just say "for any act under act under color of such office," but in 2011 Congress added the "or relating to" language. That obviously seems intended to broaden the scope of covered conduct, but what that means in practice is still unclear, just a slightly easier path for the defendants seeking removal.

As to the immunity or possible federal pardon stuff, removal only moves jurisdiction from a state court to a federal one; it doesn't change the applicable substantive law. Different procedural rules may apply, but the federal court/jury will still be applying state law, and the state will still be prosecuting the case. Jack Smith won't have any direct involvement in that case or have the authority to offer immunity to Georgia charges. The two offices may informally coordinate, especially where the two cases involve similar conduct. But these remain two separate sovereigns, and removal doesn't wholly "federalize" the case. For the same reason, a presidential pardon would not be on the table for a conviction under Georgia law, as it is not an offense against the United States.

All that said, these removal proceedings are super important because if they somehow establish that they were acting under color of their office (seems a real stretch to me but you never know what courts might do these days), then prior case law gives them a decent defense to state charges under the Supremacy Clause, meaning the whole prosecution could get tossed on constitutional grounds. Willis no doubt knows this, and I expect her to fight hard against these removal attempts.

FYI, Trump tried the same removal thing in the NY case and lost, but the election-y nature of this whole thing makes it at least less ridiculous on its face.
 
Federal officer removal is a pretty obscure area of law that is not well understood by frankly anybody. As relevant here, it gives defendants who are federal officers the right to remove the case to federal court if the prosecution is "for or relating to any act under color of such office." Courts have offered varying interpretations of that phrase, and I don't believe SCOTUS has weighed in a way that definitively interprets the current statute. Of note, it used to just say "for any act under act under color of such office," but in 2011 Congress added the "or relating to" language. That obviously seems intended to broaden the scope of covered conduct, but what that means in practice is still unclear, just a slightly easier path for the defendants seeking removal.

As to the immunity or possible federal pardon stuff, removal only moves jurisdiction from a state court to a federal one; it doesn't change the applicable substantive law. Different procedural rules may apply, but the federal court/jury will still be applying state law, and the state will still be prosecuting the case. Jack Smith won't have any direct involvement in that case or have the authority to offer immunity to Georgia charges. The two offices may informally coordinate, especially where the two cases involve similar conduct. But these remain two separate sovereigns, and removal doesn't wholly "federalize" the case. For the same reason, a presidential pardon would not be on the table for a conviction under Georgia law, as it is not an offense against the United States.

All that said, these removal proceedings are super important because if they somehow establish that they were acting under color of their office (seems a real stretch to me but you never know what courts might do these days), then prior case law gives them a decent defense to state charges under the Supremacy Clause, meaning the whole prosecution could get tossed on constitutional grounds. Willis no doubt knows this, and I expect her to fight hard against these removal attempts.

FYI, Trump tried the same removal thing in the NY case and lost, but the election-y nature of this whole thing makes it at least less ridiculous on its face.

Yet, the exceptions to allowing moving to federal courts pretty much hit every one of the exclusionary items. Not one or two. A Trifecta of them.

Overturning an election (or even challenging one in the ways this was done) cannot possibly be used as any "official" responsibility of office.
 
I found this tidbit rather humorous...Trump is holding a $100,000/plate fundraiser of Rudy's legal fees next month.
Can you imagine how paranoid Turd must be that these few guys flip on him?
 
Phil Grandpa GIF by Hey Arnold
 
I suspect that Meadows next step is to enter into negotiation with Fulton County for a possible plea deal. He could appeal the ruling also.
I fully expect a few days to get off of that sinking ship. They will file a bunch of motions and try to muddy up the calendar, but Meadows is not a cult member. He’s played both sides for as long as he could, but he isn’t going to prison for Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Meadows is now backed further into a corner as the conservative 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has now ruled that Meadows is not entitled to a new hearing on his request to remove his Fulton County criminal case to federal court.

The ruling does not bode well for other co- defendants as well, most notably:
John Eastment.

Meadows has the option to appeal the matter to the US Supreme Court - the last long shot effort available to remove the case.

Time to spill the beans Mark.

 
Meadows is now backed further into a corner as the conservative 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has now ruled that Meadows is not entitled to a new hearing on his request to remove his Fulton County criminal case to federal court.

The ruling does not bode well for other co- defendants as well, most notably:
John Eastment.

Meadows has the option to appeal the matter to the US Supreme Court - the last long shot effort available to remove the case.

Time to spill the beans Mark.

Better get that RACIST SKANK DA BOOTED!!!
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT