Mark Meadows’ Attempt To Transfer Georgia Election Case To Federal Court Is Unsuccessful

Aiexpress – Mark Meadows, the former chief of staff for Donald Trump, has suffered another setback in his attempt to move the election interference case against him in Georgia to federal court.

After his attempt was rejected by a federal judge last year, Meadows decided to appeal to a three-judge panel for the U.S. Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit. In December, the panel upheld that “the events leading to this criminal action were not connected to Meadows’s official responsibilities.” Therefore, they concluded that the case should be handled by the state of Georgia. Following this decision, Meadows requested a “rehearing” by the entire 11th Circuit to further review his appeal.

The 11th Circuit rejected the request on Wednesday, stating in a brief order: “The Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED, with no judge in regular active service on the Court having requested a poll for rehearing en banc.”

Meadows wanted to transfer the case from state court to federal court. This was based on a law that allows for the transfer of criminal proceedings when an individual is charged for actions they allegedly committed as a federal official while acting within the scope of their office.

In August, Meadows, along with Trump and 17 others, entered a plea of not guilty to all charges in a comprehensive racketeering indictment. The indictment accuses them of attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia.


According to the indictment, the former White House chief of staff is implicated in eight “overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.” However, his attorney asserts that none of the actions mentioned in the indictment are considered criminal on the part of Mr. Meadows.

According to legal experts and professionals in the field, a shift to federal court could offer several potential benefits. One such advantage involves the potential for a more receptive jury pool, which could prove advantageous for the case. Additionally, the possibility of delays that could arise from such a decision is another factor to consider.

Reference Article

Articles: 3338

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *