Mark Meadows Seeks Dismissal in Controversial Arizona Alternate Electors Case

By Matthew Holloway |

Mark Meadows, the former White House Chief of Staff, has requested the Maricopa County Superior Court to dismiss the charges against him concerning the prosecution of Arizona’s Republican alternate electors. Meadows asserts that the allegations made by Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes are “politically motivated.”

“Today, we filed in Arizona court a motion to dismiss Kris Mayes’s politically motivated charges against Mr. Meadows, which violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause,” stated Meadows’ attorney, George J. Terwilliger III. “The West Wing is central to the Executive Branch, and state-level attempts to police federal officials, such as Mr. Meadows, are strictly prohibited. He has been wrongfully implicated in this case, and we urge the Attorney General to acknowledge her mistake and withdraw the case.”

Attorney Ann Chapman elaborated on the situation, highlighting that federal officials can’t be prosecuted by states for actions taken in their official capacities due to the Supremacy Clause. “Meadows lacked any involvement in President Trump’s campaign. His actions were strictly in his role as Chief of Staff, coordinating the president’s schedule with campaign responsibilities,” she explained.

In April 2024, Mayes indicted 18 individuals, including Arizona’s 11 alternate electors, who created a contingent certification for President Donald Trump following the 2020 election, labeling Trump an “unindicted co-conspirator.” Recently, the Maricopa County Superior Court ordered Mayes to rework her entire case.

Richie Taylor, spokesperson for the Arizona Attorney General, responded, “We strongly disagree with the court’s decision and will pursue a special action to appeal the ruling.”

Mel McDonald, a former metro Phoenix county judge and U.S. Attorney for Arizona, noted to the Associated Press that courts typically remand cases to grand juries if prosecutors present misleading evidence or fail to provide proper legal instructions. “It happens occasionally, but it’s not common,” he remarked.

On May 19, 2025, Judge Sam J. Myers dealt a significant blow to prosecutors by ordering the case against seven Trump campaign advisors and the 11 alternate electors back to a grand jury, stating that Mayes’ team neglected to include the text of the 1887 Electoral Count Act, which is crucial to the defense’s argument.

Defense attorney Stephen Binhak expressed satisfaction with the ruling, stating, “We are extremely pleased with the court’s decision, and we believe the judge made the right call.”

Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.