Federal Judge to Hear Arguments on Mark Meadows’ Indictment in Georgia
A federal judge in Atlanta is set to hear arguments on Monday regarding whether Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff, should be allowed to fight the Georgia indictment accusing him of participating in an illegal scheme to overturn the 2020 election in federal court instead of a state court. Meadows, along with former President Donald Trump and 17 others, was charged earlier this month by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who used Georgia’s racketeering law to bring the case. Willis alleges that they were involved in a wide-ranging conspiracy to unlawfully keep Trump in power after his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.
Lawyers for Meadows contend that the charges in the indictment are baseless and should be dismissed. They argue that his actions occurred solely during his tenure as Chief of Staff and were part of his duties, thus not criminal in nature. They are requesting that U.S. District Judge Steve Jones move the case to federal court to halt any proceedings at the state level.
Willis’ team, on the other hand, maintains that the actions in question were politically motivated and illegal under the Hatch Act, which prohibits partisan political activity by federal employees. They believe the case should remain in Fulton County Superior Court. The allegations against Meadows include participating in meetings and communications with state lawmakers, traveling to Atlanta’s suburbs during a ballot envelope signature audit, arranging a phone call between Trump and a Georgia secretary of state investigator, and participating in a phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, during which Trump suggested finding the votes needed for him to win Georgia.
Willis’ team has subpoenaed several witnesses to appear at the hearing, including Raffensperger, former Georgia secretary of state’s office chief investigator Frances Watson, and two lawyers who worked for Trump in Georgia after the election. They have also submitted excerpts of previously taken depositions, including one from former Meadows assistant Cassidy Hutchinson.
Meadows’ lawyers argue that he is not entitled to immunity under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution because his actions were improper political activity that fell outside the scope of his duties and were motivated by personal or criminal reasons. They emphasize that the issue at hand is whether the case should be moved to federal court, and Meadows has met the threshold for such a move.
At least four others charged in the indictment, including U.S. Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark, are also seeking to move the case to federal court. The other three individuals—former Georgia Republican Party chair David Shafer, Georgia state Sen. Shawn Still, and Cathy Latham—signed a certificate falsely declaring Trump as the winner of the 2020 presidential election.
As the arguments unfold in court, the fate of the indictment against Meadows and the other individuals involved in the alleged scheme to overturn the election hangs in the balance. The decision on whether the case should proceed in federal or state court could have significant implications for the outcome and potential consequences of the charges.
Read More US Politics News
Comments are closed.