Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s former White House chief of staff, failed to convince a judge that his criminal case related to the 2020 election in Arizona should be moved to federal court, which could have made it easier to have the charges dismissed.

Meadows similarly failed in his bid to move the criminal case against him in Georgia related to the 2020 election to federal court but has asked the US Supreme Court to weigh in.

Meadows and 17 other Trump associates, including the fake electors from that state and several individuals connected to his campaign, were indicted earlier this year over their efforts to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss. Meadows has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

US District Judge John Tuchi ruled that Meadows had mounted the effort too late and disagreed with his arguments as to why the “untimely” bid should be allowed to proceed.

But Tuchi, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, also wrote in the 15-page ruling that Meadows had failed to show how the conduct at issue in his criminal case related to his official duties as Trump’s last chief of staff, an argument that Meadows has been pushing as he’s sought to avoid criminal prosecution.

“The State’s charged conduct is unrelated to Mr. Meadows’s official duties,” the judge wrote Monday. “Although the Court credits Mr. Meadows’s theory that the Chief of Staff is responsible for acting as the President’s gatekeeper, that conclusion does not create a causal nexus between Mr. Meadows’s official authority and the charged conduct.”

CNN has reached out to Meadows’ attorney in Arizona for comment.

Tuchi went on to criticize Meadows for what he described as an attempt by the former chief of staff to rewrite the state’s indictment against him.

“Contrary to Mr. Meadows’s assertions, the State has not indicted Mr. Meadows for merely facilitating communication to and from the President or for simply staying abreast of campaign goings-on,” he wrote. “Instead, the State has indicted Mr. Meadows for allegedly orchestrating and participating in an illegal electioneering scheme. Few, if any, of the State’s factual allegations even resemble the secretarial duties that Mr. Meadows maintains are the subject of the indictment.”

He continued: “None of the factual allegations at issue here mention management of the President’s time or facilitation of communication to and from the President, much less that any such time management or communication facilitation constitutes the charged conduct in this case. Similarly, contrary to Mr. Meadows’s reframing of the indictment, he is not being prosecuted for receiving text messages intended to simply keep him ‘apprised of what was happening’ with the Trump campaign.”

This story has been updated with additional details.