One said it “cannot be right” that “everything” done while serving as chief of staff should be considered “within official duties” - naming “electioneering on behalf of a specific political candidate” and “an alleged effort to unlawfully change the outcome of the election” as examples of actions that would fall outside that category. “What the prosecution here is for … are acts taken in the West Wing of the White House, by the highest appointed White House official,” said Meadows attorney George Terwilliger.īut the judges seemed unconvinced, according to reports. Meadows’s hope is that a federal court would dismiss the charges against him on immunity grounds. 2, 2021, phone call during which Trump urged Raffensperger to “find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have.” Willis charged Meadows in August with breaking Georgia’s RICO law and soliciting Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to violate his oath of office, citing Meadows’s participation in the infamous Jan. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Fulton County, Ga. Key players: Former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows U.S. Georgia election interferenceĪppeals court skeptical of Mark Meadows’s push to move his criminal case to federal court Law 19-171 enacted this chapter into law.Lawyers for former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows argue that Meadows was acting in his role as a federal official when he aided former President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure a second term even after states had certified his defeat - and that Meadows’s Georgia case should be moved to federal court as a result. Act 19-261, December 21, 2011, 2).įor temporary (90 day) amendment of section, see § 201 of Receiving Stolen Property and Public Safety Amendments Congressional Review Emergency Amendment Act of 2012 (D.C. Emergency Legislationįor temporary (90 day) amendment of section, see § 201 of Receiving Stolen Property and Public Safety Amendments Emergency Amendment Act of 2011 (D.C. (c)(2), substituted “specified discovery” for “specialized discovery”. If the special motion to dismiss is granted, dismissal shall be with prejudice. (d) The court shall hold an expedited hearing on the special motion to dismiss, and issue a ruling as soon as practicable after the hearing. Such an order may be conditioned upon the plaintiff paying any expenses incurred by the defendant in responding to such discovery. (2) When it appears likely that targeted discovery will enable the plaintiff to defeat the motion and that the discovery will not be unduly burdensome, the court may order that specified discovery be conducted. (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, upon the filing of a special motion to dismiss, discovery proceedings on the claim shall be stayed until the motion has been disposed of. (b) If a party filing a special motion to dismiss under this section makes a prima facie showing that the claim at issue arises from an act in furtherance of the right of advocacy on issues of public interest, then the motion shall be granted unless the responding party demonstrates that the claim is likely to succeed on the merits, in which case the motion shall be denied. (a) A party may file a special motion to dismiss any claim arising from an act in furtherance of the right of advocacy on issues of public interest within 45 days after service of the claim.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |