close
close

Ourladyoftheassumptionparish

Part – Newstatenabenn

Supreme Court declines to advance Georgia case against Trump’s former chief of staff
patheur

Supreme Court declines to advance Georgia case against Trump’s former chief of staff

By LINDSAY WHITEHURSTA Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to allow Trump’s former White House chief of staff Marcos Prados move the election interference case against him in Georgia to federal court, where he would have argued that he had immunity from prosecution.

The justices did not detail their reasoning in a brief order rejecting his appeal, as is typical. There were no publicly noted dissents.

Meadows was one of 19 people accused in Georgia and accused of participating in an illegal plan to keep the then president donald trump in power after losing the 2020 election. Trump was also impeached, although after winning reelection last week to a second term a trial appears unlikely, at least while he is in office. Both men have denied wrongdoing.

Attorney George Terwilliger said Meadows will continue to maintain his innocence in state court and hopes to obtain an exoneration.

It is unclear what effect the election results might have on other defendants in the case, which is largely on hold after an appeals court agreed to review whether to eliminate Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for her romantic relationship with the special prosecutor she had hired to lead the case.

Meadows had gone to the Supreme Court in an effort to remove the charges from Georgia courts. He maintains that the case belongs in federal court because it relates to his duties as a federal official. He pointed to the Supreme Court ruling granting Trump broad immunity from criminal prosecution to support his argument.

“A White House chief of staff facing criminal charges based on actions related to his work for the president of the United States should not be a difficult decision, especially now that this court has recognized that federal immunity affects evidence that can be considered, not just what conduct can form the basis of liability,” his lawyers wrote.