ATLANTA (CN) — A federal judge on Friday rejected a request from former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to move the charges against him in the Georgia election interference case from state to federal court.
In a 49-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Steve Jones said Meadows did not meet the burden for demonstrating the case should be removed and remanded it to Fulton Superior Court.
Jones said the evidence presented “overwhelmingly suggests that Meadows was not acting in his scope of executive branch duties during most of the overt acts alleged” in the indictment brought last month against Meadows, former President Donald Trump and 17 others.
During an evidentiary hearing held last week, Meadows testified for over three hours in defense of his actions on behalf of former President Donald Trump, even though he was not required to.
In a motion filed this month, Meadows argued that his case in the racketeering indictment should be prosecuted under federal court because he was acting in his capacity as a government official at the time.
“Even if Meadows took on tasks that mirror the duties that he carried out when acting in his official role as White House chief of staff (such as attending meetings, scheduling phone calls, and managing the president’s time) he has failed to demonstrate how the election-related activities that serve as the basis for the charges in the Indictment are related to any of his official acts,” Jones wrote.
“As the substance of the overt acts constituted a significant part of Meadows’s testimony and proof of his acting within the scope of his federal office, the court concludes that based on the factual evidence, Meadows was not acting in the scope of his office for purposes of federal officer removal.”
The Barack Obama appointee added that the federal court lacks jurisdiction over Meadow's criminal prosecution and that there is a “strong judicial policy against federal interference with state criminal proceedings.”
Jones wrote that "to establish a RICO conspiracy the state only need prove that any co-conspirator committed one overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, whether the overt act was specifically charged in the indictment or not."
"In other words, the state can prove its RICO charge against Meadows by showing any one of his co-defendants committed any overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy — whether that overt act is in the indictment or not."
During an evidentiary hearing held last week, Meadows testified for over three hours in defense of his actions on behalf of former President Donald Trump, even though he was not required to.
In a motion filed this month, Meadows argued his case in the racketeering indictment should be prosecuted in federal court because he was acting in his capacity as a government official at the time.
Meadows faces two charges — violating Georgia's anti-racketeering law and soliciting a violation of oath by public officer, a felony. The charges stem from Meadows' involvement on Trump’s infamous Jan. 2, 2021 phone call, in which the former president pressed Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" enough votes to overturn Biden's victory in the state. The indictment accuses Meadows of “soliciting” Raffensperger to violate his oath of office by altering the certified returns for presidential electors.
The indictment further mentions how Meadows visited Cobb County in December 2020 to observe the secretary of state's audit of absentee ballots, how he worked to coordinate the “alternate” state electors, and the emails in which he lobbied top Justice Department officials to investigate allegations of voter fraud in Georgia and elsewhere.
“Meadows’s participation in the phone call clearly reflects campaign-related interests” and noted that because the call was made in regards to private litigation brought by the Trump campaign against Georgia, it does not fall into his role as chief of staff, Jones wrote.
The 41-count indictment further mentions how Meadows visited Cobb County in December 2020 to observe the secretary of state's nonpublic audit of absentee ballots, how he worked to coordinate the “alternate” state electors, attended meetings with Trump and officials in Michigan and Pennsylvania about election fraud, and the emails in which he lobbied top Justice Department officials to investigate allegations of voter fraud in Georgia and elsewhere.
Jones found that under the Constitution, executive power does not extend to delegating states’ election procedures. He also noted that Meadows is bound by the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from using their executive authority to interfere with the results of an election, or from engaging in political activity that is “actively directed toward the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group.”
“The types of behaviors that Meadows is alleged to be involved in included post-election activities and election outcomes in various States pertaining to a particular candidate for office. If these potentially political activities indeed come against the Hatch Act, its regulations limit such efforts,” Jones wrote.
“These prohibitions on executive branch employees (including the White House chief of staff) reinforce the court’s conclusion that Meadows has not shown how his actions relate to the scope of his federal executive branch office. Federal officer removal is thereby inappropriate.”
Jones said that based on the evidence presented during last week’s hearing, Meadows' actions were taken to affect state election procedures on behalf of the Trump campaign. He noted that Meadows himself testified that working for the Trump campaign would be outside the scope of a White House Chief of Staff.
Meadows only carried his burden in showing that one of the eight overt acts attributed to him in the indictment could have occurred within the scope of his federal office duties, according to the ruling.
That act was a text message sent from Meadows to a congressperson in Pennsylvania asking for the phone number of the speaker and leader of the Legislature.
Jones concluded that it is a “conceivable” activity within the scope of Meadows’ federal duties, as he testified that retrieving phone numbers of various state officials was a routine part of his role.
Four other defendants in the case have also filed for federal removal, and Trump recently indicated he will likely do the same in the coming weeks.
The judge’s decision is a significant win for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her prosecution team in the first major legal test of her sprawling racketeering case.
Willis has fought to keep the proceedings in Fulton County and try all 19 defendants together. If any of the defendants succeed in their attempts to remove their charges, the entire case could potentially be moved to federal court. This would result in a broader jury pool outside of Atlanta, which is largely Democratic, and no cameras allowed inside the court proceedings.
But criminal indictment would still be brought under state law even if any or all of the cases are moved to federal court, meaning the defendants would be punished under state law if convicted. Even if Trump is reelected as president in 2024, their sentences would not be pardonable under federal law.
Follow @Megwiththenews
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
