Dem
51
GOP
49
Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has been indicted in Georgia for racketeering, along with Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and more than a dozen others. Meadows desperately wants the case moved out of state court and into federal court, in part because in a state trial in Fulton County the jury pool will be heavily Democratic, whereas a federal trial would pull jurors from the suburbs as well, so more Republicans would be in it. His problem is that he is accused of violating a state law, not a federal law. The act in question relates to his setting up (and participating in) the infamous phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) in which Trump demanded that Raffensperger "find" another 11,780 votes for him. Election interference is a state crime, not a federal crime.
Meadows lost round one of his attempt to get the trial moved to federal court because the acts he is accused of relate to Trump's reelection campaign, and were not part of his official White House duties. If the acts in the indictment are not part of his job description, then there is no reason for a federal trial. Acts related to Trump's reelection campaign could not possibly be related to his official duties, because the Hatch Act bans federal employees from engaging in campaign activities while at work.
On Friday, a federal appeals court heard oral arguments in Meadows' appeal. The three judges didn't seem impressed. Even if Meadows' acts did relate to this official work, which the lower court ruled they did not, there is still a problem: A 234-year-old law that says when federal officials are charged with crimes relating to their official duties they are to be tried in federal court. However, the law does not say that it applies to former officials, only current ones, which Meadows is not. Judge William Pryor noted: "It might well be that Congress could rationally assume there's a heightened reason for removal where you're dealing with a current officer, because it involves ongoing operations of the federal government. And that heightened concern might not exist, where you have a former officer, because it doesn't involve the ongoing operations of the government." If the appeals court rules against Meadows, he could try to go to the Supreme Court, but it doesn't have to take the case. (V)