Supreme Court Denies Mark Meadows’s Request in 2020 Election Interference Prosecution

Then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in the East Room of the White House in Washington, on Sept. 23, 2020. Joshua Roberts/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Nov. 12 turned away former Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows’s request to transfer his election interference case from a Georgia state court to federal court.

The justices issued the court’s new unsigned order without explaining why, as is its custom when rejecting petitions.

Meadows filed his petition with the Supreme Court on July 26, arguing that the case should be heard in federal court because he was performing his duties as a federal officer when he disputed election results.

Meadows was indicted by a state grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, in August 2023, over his role in President Donald Trump’s challenge to the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia, a state he ultimately lost in that election.

Meadows was accused of violating the Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act during the period from Nov. 4, 2020, which is the day after that year’s presidential election, to Sept. 15, 2022, for his allegedly illegal efforts to contest the presidential results in the state.

Among other things, the indictment said Meadows arranged a telephone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Chief Investigator Frances Watson in which Trump “falsely stated” that he prevailed in the presidential election “by hundreds of thousands of votes,” and told Watson that “when the right answer comes out you’ll be praised.”

The indictment said Meadows sent a text message to an employee of the Office of the Georgia Secretary of State asking, “Is there a way to speed up Fulton county signature verification in order to have results before Jan 6 if the trump campaign assist [sic] financially.”

The indictment also said Meadows solicited Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to violate his oath of office by “unlawfully altering” “the certified returns for presidential electors,” contrary to Georgia law.

He argued that the case should be heard in federal court because, “for nearly two centuries, Congress has provided a federal forum for federal officers facing criminal charges brought by state and local officials,” according to the petition.

“Over time, Congress has consistently expanded access to federal forums for federal officers invoking federal defenses,” he argued.

A federal district court in Georgia declined to stay the prosecution in September 2023.

The district court found that a “heavy majority” of the acts attributed to Meadows were not related to his official duties.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled against Meadows in December 2023, allowing the prosecution in Fulton County to proceed.

The circuit court determined “the events giving rise to this criminal action were not related to Meadows’s official duties.”

Fulton County prosecutors filed a brief on Oct. 3, saying the circuit court ruled correctly.

The Supreme Court should reject Meadows’s argument that the ruling was “a drastic and catastrophic deviation from precedent,” they said.