Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows fails in bid to get election interference case moved

Mark Meadows , Donald Trump’s former White House chief of staff, has failed to move his election interference case in Arizona to federal court.

A judge denied Meadows’s request to move the case . Meadows faces charges in Arizona and Georgia over his alleged role in an illegal scheme to overturn the 2020 election results in Trump’s favor, authorities say.

At a hearing in Phoenix on Monday, US District Court judge John J Tuchi said Meadows missed a deadline for his case to be moved to federal court, did not offer a good reason for the move and also failed to show the allegations relate to his official duties when he was then-president Trump’s chief of staff.

Meadows unsuccessfully attempted the same legal move in a separate election interference case a year ago in Georgia.

Prosecutors argue, in a bid to keep Trump in office despite losing the 2020 presidential election, Meadows worked with other Trump campaign members to submit names of fake electors from Arizona and other states to Congress.

President Joe Biden won in the state of Arizona by 10,457 votes in the 2020 election.

According to the Arizona indictment, Meadows confided in a White House staff member in early November 2020 that Trump, who is referred to as the “unindicted co conspirator 1” throughout the indictment, had lost the election. Prosecutors allege despite this, Meadows arranged calls and meetings with state officials to discuss the fake elector conspiracy.

His attorneys say nothing Meadows is accused of in Arizona was criminal. Instead, they argue the allegations against him in the indictment consist of messages from others trying to get ideas in front of Trump.

Meadows has pleaded not guilty to the charges in Arizona and Georgia. Trump was not charged in Arizona but a total of 18 Republicans were, including 11 who submitted a document falsely claiming he had won the state, another Trump aide and five lawyers connected to him.

Meadows hoped moving the case to federal court could lead to a quick dismissal on the grounds he was immune from prosecution as a federal officer at the time.

In a motion in July, his attorneys argued: “Mr. Meadows has the right to remove this matter because he has a federal defense of Supremacy Clause immunity to the State charge and Congress has provided that federal courts are the appropriate forum to adjudicate such issues.”

They added: “The conduct giving rise to the charges in the indictment all occurred during his tenure and as part of his service as White House Chief of Staff.”

It is not yet known whether Meadows will appeal the judge’s decision.