Donald Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows has lost his latest bid to have the election interference case against him in Georgia removed to federal court.
When a federal judge denied his effort last year, Meadows appealed to a three-judge panel for the U.S. Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit, which in December affirmed that “the events giving rise to this criminal action were not related to Meadows’s official duties,” so the matter should remain with the state of Georgia. Meadows then requested that the entire 11th Circuit hold a “rehearing” to consider his appeal.
The 11th Circuit denied that request Wednesday, saying in a very short order: “The Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED, no judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc.”
In this Sept. 23, 2020 file photo White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows departs after President Donald Trump delivered remarks in honor of Bay of Pigs Veterans in the East Room of the White House on in Washington, DC.
Joshua Roberts/Getty Images, FILE
Meadows was seeking to remove the case based on a law that calls for the removal of criminal proceedings when someone is charged for actions they allegedly took as a federal official acting “under color” of their office.
Meadows, along with Trump and 17 others, pleaded not guilty in August to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia.
The former White House chief of staff is accused in the indictment of participating in eight “overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy,” while his attorney has said that “nothing Mr. Meadows is alleged in the indictment to have done is criminal.”
The potential advantages of a removal to federal court, attorneys and law professors have said, would be the possibility of a more sympathetic jury pool and the potential delays such a move could cause.
Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows’ request for a rehearing in the case involving his removal from the Georgia ballot has been denied by the appeals court. The decision comes after a lower court ruled that Meadows did not meet the residency requirements to run for Congress in the state.
Meadows, who served as Chief of Staff under former President Donald Trump, had filed a lawsuit challenging the decision to remove him from the ballot for the 11th Congressional District in Georgia. The lawsuit argued that Meadows had established residency in the state and was therefore eligible to run for office.
However, the lower court disagreed, finding that Meadows had not lived in Georgia long enough to meet the residency requirements outlined in the state’s constitution. The court ruled that Meadows had not been a resident of Georgia for at least one year prior to the election, as required by law.
In response to the ruling, Meadows filed a request for a rehearing with the appeals court, hoping to overturn the decision and be reinstated on the ballot. However, the appeals court has now denied his request, upholding the lower court’s decision and effectively ending Meadows’ bid for Congress in Georgia.
The decision is a blow to Meadows, who had been considered a frontrunner in the race for the 11th Congressional District. His removal from the ballot leaves the field open for other candidates to compete for the seat, which is currently held by Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk.
Meadows has not yet commented on the appeals court’s decision, but it is likely to be a disappointment for him and his supporters. The ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of meeting residency requirements when running for office, and underscores the need for candidates to carefully consider their eligibility before entering a race.
Overall, the denial of Mark Meadows’ request for a rehearing in the Georgia case removal highlights the complexities of election law and serves as a cautionary tale for aspiring candidates seeking public office.
