Legal Insurrection by William A. Jacobson Tuesday, August 15, 2023
“Nothing Mr. Meadows is alleged in the indictment to have done is criminal per se: arranging Oval Office meetings, contacting state officials on the President’s behalf, visiting a state government building, and setting up a phone call for the President. One would expect a Chief of Staff to the President of the United States to do these sorts of things…. This is precisely the kind of state interference in a federal official’s duties that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits, and that the removal statute shields against.”Mark Meadows has invoked a federal statute that allows removal of a case from state to federal court where the issue in the state case is the defendant’s conduct as a federal official.
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸
@McAdooGordon
As predicted 👇 there'll be "removal" motions from likely all the defendants who were federal officials at the time of the acts. This is because, in general, the states CANNOT use state law against federal officials for things they did as feds. Federalism doesn't work otherwise.
Quote
Rob O'Donnell
@odonnell_r
·
12h
Let the fun begin. Former Trump Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows legal team already submitted motion of removal
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscoLeslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸
@McAdooGordon
·
11h
This is an important point of Constitutional law. It's found in 1 of the 1st cases 1st year law students study: McCulloch v. MD, decided in 1819. A holding of the case is that state actions cannot bind the federal govt, setting the stage for immunity for federal officers.
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸
@McAdooGordon
·
11h
Federalism is an important feature of our Constitutional system; it divides power between the federal govt & the state govts, which sets them a bit at odds w/one another & preserves local issues for local elected officials. It's part of the liberty design of our federal republic.
In the case of Meadows, all of his actions were in the context of him being Trump’s White House Chief of Staff, and none of his conduct in and of itself was criminal. He is looped into this because under conspiracy theories (including RICO) even lawful actions in furtherance of in illegal conspiracy could render the defendant liable.
From Meadow’s Notice of Removal filed in federal court in the Northern District of Georgia:
Defendant Mark R. Meadows, former Chief of Staff to the President of the United States, removes this proceeding from the Fulton County Superior Court (Case No. 23SC188947, filed August 14, 2023), insofar as it charges Mr. Meadows in two counts (Counts 1 and 28) of a 41-count indictment, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 & 1455.
Mr. Meadows has the right to remove this matter. The conduct giving rise to the charges in the indictment all occurred during his tenure and as part of his service as Chief of Staff. In these circumstances, federal law provides for prompt removal of a “criminal prosecution . . . commenced in a State court . . . against or directed to” a federal official, “in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of [his] office.” 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). The removal statute “protects the Federal Government from the interference with its operations that would ensue were a State able, for example, to arrest and bring to trial in a State court for an alleged offense against the law of the State, officers and agents of the Federal Government acting within the scope of their authority.” Watson v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc., 551 U.S. 142, 150 (2007) (cleaned up).0F1
More:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/08/mark-meadows-files-to-remove-georgia-state-prosecution-to-federal-court/
