Mark Meadows Files To Remove Georgia State Prosecution To Federal Court
“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…. This is precisely the kind of state interference in a federal official’s duties that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits, and that the removal statute shields against.”
Mark Meadows has invoked a federal statute that allows removal of a case from state to federal court where the issue in the state case is the defendant’s conduct as a federal official.
This is an important point of Constitutional law. It's found in 1 of the 1st cases 1st year law students study: McCulloch v. MD, decided in 1819. A holding of the case is that state actions cannot bind the federal govt, setting the stage for immunity for federal officers.
— Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 (@McAdooGordon) August 16, 2023
In the case of Meadows, all of his actions were in the context of him being Trump’s White House Chief of Staff, and none of his conduct in and of itself was criminal. He is looped into this because under conspiracy theories (including RICO) even lawful actions in furtherance of in illegal conspiracy could render the defendant liable.
From Meadow’s Notice of Removal filed in federal court in the Northern District of Georgia:
Defendant Mark R. Meadows, former Chief of Staff to the President of the United States, removes this proceeding from the Fulton County Superior Court (Case No. 23SC188947, filed August 14, 2023), insofar as it charges Mr. Meadows in two counts (Counts 1 and 28) of a 41-count indictment, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 & 1455.
Mr. Meadows has the right to remove this matter. The conduct giving rise to the charges in the indictment all occurred during his tenure and as part of his service as Chief of Staff. In these circumstances, federal law provides for prompt removal of a “criminal prosecution . . . commenced in a State court . . . against or directed to” a federal official, “in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of [his] office.” 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). The removal statute “protect[s] the Federal Government from the interference with its operations that would ensue were a State able, for example, to arrest and bring to trial in a State court for an alleged offense against the law of the State, officers and agents of the Federal Government acting within the scope of their authority.” Watson v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc., 551 U.S. 142, 150 (2007) (cleaned up).0F1
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. And they have far less to do with the interests of state law than, for example, murder charges that have been successfully removed. E.g., In Re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1, 71 (1890); Tennessee v. Davis, 100 U.S. 257, 260–62 (1879). This is precisely the kind of state interference in a federal official’s duties that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits, and that the removal statute shields against. See Neagle, 135 U.S. at 76 (holding that a federal official carrying out his duties “is not liable to answer in the courts of [a State]”).
Mr. Meadows intends to file a motion to dismiss the indictment pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure as soon as is feasible. Mr. Meadows respectfully requests that the Court “order an evidentiary hearing to be held promptly” and “dispos[e] of the prosecution as justice shall require.” 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(5). Here, justice requires the prompt dismissal of the charges against Mr. Meadows. At a minimum, in the meantime, federal law requires granting removal, which will halt the state-court proceedings against Mr. Meadows, see 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(5), while the motion to dismiss is resolved.
Fani Willis, the Fulton County prosecutor, may argue that to the extent Meadows took actions, he was not taking those actions as Chief of Staff, but to assist Trump’s campaign effort, so the conduct is not covered. Meadows anticipates that arguments, listing in the Notice each of the factual allegations against him in the Indictment, to demonstrate that his actions were as Chief of Staff:
… The charged conduct comprises acts taken by Mr. Meadows, whether in an individual or official capacity, under color of his role as Chief of Staff to the President of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1).
As is apparent on the face of the indictment, as part of his official duties as Chief of Staff, Mr. Meadows arranged meetings for the President at the White House and communicated with state lawmakers and officials. Mr. Meadows went to a site in Fulton County where the Chief Investigator was conducting an audit of the results of the 2020 Presidential election because—and only because—he was serving as Chief of Staff. He wanted to report back to the President on how the audit was proceeding and told him the following day that the Georgia officials were conducting their work in exemplary fashion. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Meadows, in his role as Chief of Staff, arranged a phone call between the President and Georgia officials, including the Secretary of State and the Chief Investigator. These and the other acts that form the basis for the charges against Mr. Meadows all fall squarely within his conduct as Chief of Staff.
Indeed, as explained below, it is clear from the face of the indictment that the charges against Mr. Meadows should be dismissed under the Supremacy Clause. But for purposes of removal, the Court need not make that determination. 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.
Trump may have a more difficult time removing the case since he was a political candidate and his conduct was not as president. But as the Meadows Notice demonstrates, there is a fairly low bar to removal and any “plausible” claim that the conduct charged was in the context of an official federal capacity should suffice. Other defendants who were not serving in any federal capacity at the time would not be able to invoke the statute.
In other news, I had a good long conversation with Tony Katz this morning about the Georgia indictment. (Sorry, no transcript)
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Bravo! Kudos to Mark Meadows and his lawyers. Spot on.
Uh…. Where is GOP Chairmoron Ronna Romney McDaniels?
What is McDaniel supposed to do?
Maybe encourage Kemp to use the new Georgia law to remove Fani Willis from her position for not prosecuting violent criminals and instead devoting all her energies to persecuting her political enemies.
The problem is that the Democrats and Rinos have the same political enemies. Both detest America first politicians and their supporters and have for decades before Trump was involved in politics.
The GOPe tried to destroy the Tea Party movement and decades before that did the same to Goldwater Republicans. Reagan was finally able to break through and win because of the Carter economic collapse and groundswell of support from blue collar Democrat voters and a deal with the GOPe to make Bush 1 his VP.
Even under the new law (assuming it survives the legal challenge), Kemp does NOT have the power to remove a DA.
Kemp is more than happy to have that Soros DA do his dirty work for him. He is delusional in his national office aspirations.
Gee I dunno, maybe jumping up and down and causing merry hell for the temerity of Democrats to even dare to outlaw free speech?
Then again I’m old school like that.
How exactly is she to “cause merry hell” for anyone, merely by jumping up and down? She has no power whatsoever. Dems have no reason to pay attention to any histrionics she may engage in.
Republicans’ silent acquiescence to any and everything outrageous, immoral and illegal and beyond that the left does in pursuit of their two goals power and the destruction of the US….Which is your point and what Milhouse so completely misses….is probably a big factor in what has gotten us to this point. They do it because not only will we not do anything we won’t even say anything.
Who??? 🙂
At a fundraiser drinking champagne
Not so sure about being ‘spot on.’ In the Federal District Court for the Northern district Court for the Northern District of Georgia, where Meadows is trying to move his case to,, there are 11 District Judges. Six were nominated by The Won or Slowy, the rest by Big Don or W Bush. If you look at the Senior Judges all 7 were nominated by Jimmy Bumpkin(still in hospice care) The Won or Billyboy. Thus out of 18 possible judges, 13 are Dem nominees. Those odds may be better than what a Fulton County Superior Court would offer Meadows, but they are awful odds to face.
But didn’t Roberts say that federal judges were not political?
Didn’t Robert also say Obastard is a tax?
Obastardcare
And they a randomly assigned to their cases. A colleague in DC tells me that the Obama appointed Judge assigned to the Trump case there was assigned randomly. She just wasn’t the first name that popped up. The Chief Judge kept running his randomizer until it did.
Randomly, my ass
Any chance lawyers rising up and salvaging the law from what lawyers have turned it into…. A dark evil shadow of what it was meant to be and more political and corrupt than any political campaign…,Nah… didn’t think so
Yep, lawyers think law-itis is okay.
Our Northern District judges here in Georgia are pretty straight..if they’re going to play games, I wouldn’t think it would be on this issue.
The John Doe investigation’s started in 2010, I remember it well because I knew some of the people involved.
Nothing anyone did is illegal. This prosecutor should be disbarred. A lot of constitutionality protected speech can never add up to a crime. It just adds up to, well, a lot of speech. Entrusting Imbeciles like this with power is dangerous, as we can see.
This ” CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED FREESPEECH ” Defense…is D.O.A. DEAD ON ARRIVAL . Sorry
Yes, the truth is so passe, isn’t it? Besides, we know the communist scumbags have no respect for the constitution.
The truth is there is no 1st amendment right defence. Feel free to say exactly as you want but the 1st amendment doesnt protect you when that speech is in furtherance of a crime.
There is no underlying crime in furtherance of which the speech is alleged to have been made. Therefore the speech is protected.
The ONLY crime that took place was the the fraudulent ballots and election manipulations but apparently democrats are NEVER held accountable for ANY broken laws… and “laws “ are wished into existence to get Republicans..,but you’re cool with that…tells us all we need to know about you
“Defence” — another country heard from.
We don’t want foreigners butting in. Assuming it wasn’t your dictation misunderstanding you…. And I’m sure it wasn’t.
Oh yah because it’s (D) ifferent huh now when the Dems it. You utter clown
These “charges” largely mirror the federal nonsense. Either President Trump was acting within the scope of his presidential authority to safeguard the law (in which case he has immunity) or he was engaged in protected First Amendment activity. Such defenses are “DOA” only in a forum that ignores the rule of law. Or in other words, a banana republic/police state.
Remember the Duke Lacrosse case? The prosecutor was utterly deranged, ignoring exculpatory evidence.
Despite his egregious actions under the color of authority, and after he put three young innocent men through hell, he was disbarred and ordered to spend 24 hrs in jail.
The prosecutors enjoy sovereign immunity, and they do not care what their political opposition does.
Erronius
Yeah, some, probably a lot, do. But, if one isn’t living in a banana republic, that is when other authorities, like the courts, step in to stop the sleaze prosecutors, I fear we may be at banana republic level.
In online gaming we would say
Fani Willis is griefing Mark Meadows.
What’s that? I’m not being serious? Tell that to …
UC Irvine Law Review.
PDF.
https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=ucilr
VI: Griefing; Pg517
I can’t believe there is a law review article.
Repub DA’s should start charging dem lawyers throughout the state with the same bullschiff as fani is doing. Matter of fact, they should also file charges against her.
LOL, do you really feel that there is a Republican anywhere with the balls to try that?
I dont think I have Seen MARK MEADOWS Communications in the Illegal FALSE ELECTORS SCHEME…So I can Wait to Decide when I am allowed to see the Facts of the Case . Why can’t You pl. ?
Because it’s not legitimate, it’s nakedly political. You may like that stalinist crap, but Real Americans don’t
What is an “illegal false electors scheme”? No court has found any alternate slates of electors are illegal.
It doesn’t cost you anything to have Mark Meadows dragged into court.
It does cost Mr. Meadows. He must pay lawyers to represent him or he will likely go to jail even if the charges are not true. I just paid a lawyer $500 bucks for a few short, somewhat routine, documents. I would hate to see the bills for a defense even if it gets thrown out shortly after it starts.
“Trump may have a more difficult time removing the case since he was a political candidate and his conduct was not as president…”
His duty as the Executive is to ensure the laws of the country are faithfully executed. The quick thumbnail guild would be “Which actions charged *could* he have taken as a candidate, not the President?” I suspect the answer will be very few.
That statement is also par for the course by the contributors here at LI, where they continue to treat these cases as the result of rational law enforcement activities instead of the outright political motivated attacks that they are.
I was kinda thinking the same thing as georgfelis, that 45 didn’t ever stop being Potus when he was disputing the election. It is a fine point… I also believe that the entire executive branch is corrupt to the core, but they are operating with apparent impunity.
Wouldn’t the standard be the other way around? Any actions that he could have taken as a public official should be considered, such as ensuring that the elections across the land were conducted faithfully and accurately according to the laws? If he made a call to a SoS, and mentioned that there were many tranches of issues (voters moved away, were not of age, etc) and asked the SoS to look into it, while at the same time mentioning he would only need the SoS to find 12000 of these votes cast to change the outcome, it seems his personal interests align with ensuring laws are faithfully executed in his official capacity.
If all of the federal officials shown in the indictment are “removed” to federal court, where will the non-federal officials’ cases be tried?
Assuming the Federal Officials are removed to US Court, it is unlikely that any non-federal official would be convicted if their trial is in state court.
Question: Assuming the Federal Officials are removed to US Court, can Georgia remove the non-federal cases to Federal Court?
They could but they won’t..my roommate in college was from Park Ridge.
Yada, yada, yada. The legalities of the indictments are a side show; the real issue is election suppression under the color of law. Once they put Trump, Meadows et al behind bars they will go after other GOP “leaders”.
Anyone who still believes that there is any kind of rule of law in the US is a fool.
Can we just get the civil war over with already?
“As predicted there’ll be “removal” motions from likely all the defendants who were federal officials at the time of the acts. This is because, in general, the states CANNOT use state law against federal officials for things they did as feds. Federalism doesn’t work otherwise.”
If the Fulton County officials bringing these indictments didn’t know this, well, let’s just say, that’s a helluva thing.
And possibly this is evidence of professional malfeasance.
Well, Che Alexander, says she was practicing (!) when she put the indictments online hours before the grand jury indicted anyone. Clowns all around Fulton County, as Atlanta morphs into South Africa.
“Trump is charged with four felony counts under three federal statutes—18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1512, and 241—for supposedly conspiring to defraud the U.S., obstruct an official proceeding, and suppress the right of Americans to vote.
Why? Because he “spread lies” questioning the outcome of the 2020 election by claiming “that he had actually won,” according to the indictment, thus creating a “national atmosphere of mistrust and anger” and “erod[ing] public faith in the administration of the election.”
That’s the kind of language you would normally see in an editorial from The New York Times, not in a criminal indictment. It is an opinion, not an actual rendition of facts.”
Hans A. von Spakovsky, 8-8-2023
It’s hard to claim it’s a lie since election systems are largely inauditable. We can know who is certified as the winner, but we can’t really know who won. The system stands in the way of that. I lie requires that someone knows what isn’t knowable presently. Any attempt to audit election results and processes is met with such resistance and obstruction that auditors can only see select parts of the process and even those could be manipulated before the audit.
Are you trying to tell me that claims of I Won the Election after the election obstructs the election and suppresses the right to vote of those who… already voted?
Who knew.
Like a white paper from the DNC.
Meadows’ motion will be granted as will the others in the case. As for those not holding federal positions, I expect we will finally have a full trial exposing the massive corruption in Fulton County. I look forward to it, especially if it is televised. Trump is now an historical figure that will forever be remembered as the one great leader that stood against the tyranny of the Left. Trump is our Cincinnatus. He risked all to defend us, our families, our liberties, our nation, and our civilization. We owe him our complete and total support which includes annihilating his enemies who are all demons who have sold their souls to Satan in return for unprecedented power and wealth. . Today, let’s agree to start a campaign demanding that all other contenders for the Republican nomination stand down and endorse Trump. There can be no other choice. Trump may not be perfect, but he is perfect to carry the standard of Liberty and the Republic forward. MAGA Advance! Bo quarter to our enemies!
Well stated!!!
The election of the President is of national concern and states cannot claim any compelling interest in preventing the federal government from overseeing election integrity.
The whole point is not the indictment. It’s to get Trump to trial and found guilty even though it will be overturned on appeal AFTER the election. Clear election interference
Trump was not an officer, he was President, so the statutes would not apply to him. There are other avenues available.
Such as carrying out his oath to make sure the [election] laws were faithfully executed.