By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona District Court declined to assume jurisdiction in the prosecution of Mark Meadows for his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 election.
The court remanded the case back to the Maricopa County Superior Court. In the order issued on Monday, Judge John Tuchi said that Meadows’ actions concerning the 2020 election aren’t covered by the “color of office” afforded by his role as chief of staff to former President Donald Trump.
“The Court finds that Mr. Meadows fails to present good cause for his untimely filing of his Notice of Removal, and that in any event, an evaluation on the merits yields that he fails to demonstrate that the conduct charged in the state’s prosecution relates to his former color of office as Chief of Staff to the President,” wrote Tuchi.
An Arizona grand jury dropped felony indictments on Trump’s 2020 electors and their alleged conspirators, among them Meadows, earlier this year. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes accused the 18 indicted of participating in an organized “scheme” intending to “prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency.”
Mayes alleged that Meadows worked with members of the Trump campaign to coordinate and implement Arizona’s false Republican electors following the 2020 election. Meadows argued that his actions pertaining to the aftermath of the 2020 election were covered by his asserted official authority as chief of staff to the president. The district court disagreed, mainly due to Meadows’ lack of justification given for his argument.
“Indeed, rather than make any additional or alternative factual assertions to support his invocation of federal jurisdiction, Mr. Meadows simply quotes the State’s indictment verbatim,” wrote Tuchi. “Not only has Mr. Meadows not disputed any of the foregoing facts, but he has necessarily relied upon them. […] In other words, this is not a case in which opposing parties offer competing facts; rather, it is a case in which the parties offer competing characterizations of identical facts.”
Tuchi wrote that Meadows didn’t justify how his actions pertaining to the 2020 election fell under the proper scope and content of his job responsibilities as chief of staff, as Ninth Circuit precedent requires. Tuchi rejected Meadows’ characterization of his actions as a mere middleman of communication between the president and others.
“Contrary to Mr. Meadows’s assertions, the State has not indicted Mr. Meadows for merely facilitating communication to and from the President or for simply staying abreast of campaign goings-on. Instead, the State has indicted Mr. Meadows for allegedly orchestrating and participating in an illegal electioneering scheme,” wrote Tuchi. “To allow Mr. Meadows to recharacterize the State’s indictment at the level of generality that he seeks to do would be to vitiate both the federal officer removal statute and the Supreme Court precedent interpreting that statute, as every criminal prosecution of a federal officer will in some vague sense involve that officer’s staying ‘apprised of what is happening.’”
The court also rejected Meadows’ reasoning for his untimeliness in filing his notice of removal: his pursuit of an effort to convince the state to drop the charges against him, and his awaiting a Supreme Court decision in the case Trump v. United States that would lend to his immunity defense.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.