Mark Meadows has not wasted any time in petitioning a federal court to have the Georgia election case against dismissed. Meadows argues he has immunity from prosecution.
Here’s more via Fox News:
Former Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has asked to move his charges in the Georgia 2020 election interference case to federal court.
On Tuesday, Meadows petitioned the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia to remove his case from Fulton County Superior Court, arguing that federal law shields him from state prosecution for actions undertaken as a federal officer. In his court filing, attorneys for Meadows declared his intention to seek dismissal of all charges brought against him.
“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’ lawyers wrote.
Meadows was charged with two counts in a 41-count indictment brought against former President Trump and his allies by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat.
“Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution”
Meadows faces charges for soliciting an official to violate their oath of office related to the infamous 2020 phone call he arranged between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger — in which Trump asked the elections chief to “find” purportedly missing ballots that would allow him to overcome his deficit against Biden in Georgia.
In the filing, Meadows denied all wrongdoing and argued the charged conduct comprises protected actions taken in his official capacity as chief of staff to the president.
“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. One would expect a Chief of Staff to the President of the United States to do these sorts of things,” his attorneys argued.
“This is precisely the kind of state interference in a federal official’s duties that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits.”
The referenced Supremacy Clause establishes that federal law takes precedence over state laws and prohibits states from interfering with the federal government’s exercise of its constitutional powers. Meadows claimed immunity from prosecution under that clause.
I’m no legal expert but it sounds like he’s got a compelling argument to me. It will be interesting to see if the district court agrees with Meadows.