Mark Meadows Files For Dismissal In Arizona Alternate Electors Case
By Matthew Holloway |
Mark Meadows, former White House Chief of Staff, has filed a motion for the Maricopa County Superior Court to dismiss charges against him related to the prosecution of Arizona’s Republican alternate electors. Meadows argues that the charges made by Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes are “politically motivated.”
“Today we filed in the Arizona court a motion to dismiss Kris Mayes’s politically motivated charges against Mr. Meadows, which are clearly forbidden by the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause,” said Meadows’ attorney George J. Terwilliger III. “The West Wing of the White House is the beating heart of the Executive Branch, and the Supremacy Clause bars states from attempting to police federal officials, like Mr. Meadows, who worked there. For too long, Mr. Meadows has been wrongfully included in this case and the Attorney General ought to admit the error of her ways and voluntarily dismiss this case now.”
As reported by KJZZ, another of Meadow’s attorneys, Ann Chapman, explained, “States lack jurisdiction to prosecute federal officials for conduct taken within the scope of their federal offices and duties because the Supremacy Clause bars such claims.”
Chapman emphasized that given Meadows lacked any role in President Trump’s campaign, everything he did was in his capacity as White House Chief of Staff. She told the outlet that “Meadows held no role in the president’s reelection campaign,” and that he was “responsible in his capacity as chief of staff for coordinating the president’s time and attention with the campaign.”
In April 2024, Mayes indicted 18 defendants, including Arizona’s 11 alternate electors who prepared a contingent certification for President Donald Trump after the 2020 election, naming Trump an “unindicted co-conspirator.” Earlier this month. the Maricopa County Superior Court ruled that Attorney General Kris Mayes must redo her entire case.
Richie Taylor, a spokesman for the Arizona Attorney General, stated, “We vehemently disagree with the court, and we will file a special action to appeal the ruling.”
Mel McDonald, a former metro Phoenix county judge and U.S. Attorney for Arizona, explained to the Associated Press that courts remand cases to grand juries when prosecutors present misleading or incomplete evidence or fail to properly instruct jurors on the law.
“They get granted at times,” he said, but noted, “It’s not often.”
On May 19, 2025, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sam J. Myers dealt a significant setback to prosecutors by ordering the case against seven Trump campaign advisors and the 11 alternate electors back to a grand jury. Myers ruled that Mayes’ team failed to provide the text of the 1887 Electoral Count Act, central to the defense’s argument.
Defense attorney Stephen Binhak told the Washington Post, “We are extremely pleased with the court’s ruling, and we think the judge got it exactly right.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.