Mark Meadows loses bid to move Georgia election case to federal court

Donald Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows has lost his latest bid to have the election interference case against him in Georgia moved 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.

Meadows was seeking to remove the case out of state court 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.

MORE: Timeline: Criminal probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn Georgia election results

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.