Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows is asking a federal court to dismiss Georgia state criminal charges against him stemming from former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election, according to a court document.

  • Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh … that’s not how that works, Mark.

    These are state charges. They cannot, right now, simply be dismissed by a federal court. That he was a federal employee at the time of the alleged offense(s), and that the actions cited in the indictment in Georgia are ostensibly actions taken in the course of his job as a federal employee gives him grounds to request that the trial be removed to federal court, and I think that part is likely to happen. After that, his defense team can motion for dismissal, which I believe the federal court judge would have the authority to do at that time, if it is ruled so.

    The Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, which Meadows’ defense is citing as the reason the federal courts should dismiss his state charges, doesn’t prohibit “state prosecution for acts committed within the reasonable scope of their [federal] duties.” It only says that federal law takes precedence over state law. There is no conflict between federal and state law in Meadows’ case.

    Fucking hell, I’m not even a lawyer, and this is obviously hot garbage.

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is basically all incorrect from a legal (and logical) standpoint. His motion is proper, but very unlikely to be successful due to his alleged actions falling outside of the reasonable execution of his duties as the COS to the President.

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m being generous. I think his actions were with full knowledge that he was participating in an attempt to illegally overturn a fair election, but no court has made that determination yet. At present, his actions can be described as part of his role as WHCoS if he is not guilty, and since there is a presumption of innocence prior to conviction, that’s what it is right now.