A federal judge's ruling against Mark Meadows should concern Donald Trump and all of his co-defendants in the sprawling Georgia racketeering case, a columnist said Monday.
U.S. District Judge Steve C. Jones rejected a bid from the former White House chief of staff to remove his criminal case from Georgia to federal court, and his ruling highlighted a problem for Trump's claim of immunity to state charges, wrote Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin.
"Jones said that because the Hatch Act explicitly prohibits federal officials from engaging in political or campaign-related activities, Meadows’s actions in Georgia to assist the Trump campaign could not be within the scope of his federal duties," Rubin wrote.
"Jones cleverly pointed out: 'Assuming jurisdiction over this criminal prosecution would frustrate the purpose of federal officer removal when the state charges allege — not state interference with constitutionally protected federal activities, but — federal interference with constitutionally protected state actions.' That’s a bitter pill for Republicans infatuated with states’ rights."
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
The judge's ruling explicitly addressed an argument in Trump's presidential immunity defense, finding that the executive branch cannot claim power to involve itself in state elections, so Trump had no legal role as chief executive in Georgia's election outcome.
“The central question in the removal and in the prosecution itself — indeed the core of trying to understand the attempted coup — is whether there’s any possible legal justification for what was done,” said legal expert Norm Eisen. “Judge Jones is the latest to make clear there was not, and that is very bad news indeed for Meadows, Trump and the other 17 co-defendants.”
"This opinion has much broader importance than just resolving one defendant’s removal, and it has undoubtedly sent a chill down the spine of all 19 of those named in the indictment," Eisen added.
