Born2BKing
Veteran
Georgia appeals court strips DA Fani Willis of case that charged Donald Trump with election interference
Divided 2-1 ruling upends last remaining criminal case against president-electBy Bill Rankin
Updated 10 minutes ago
The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her office should be disqualified from the 2020 election interference case, a bombshell decision that upends the last remaining criminal case against incoming President Donald Trump.
In a 2-1 opinion, a panel of judges, all GOP appointees, concluded that Willis’ onetime romantic relationship with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade constituted a conflict of interest that merited her dismissal from the case.
“After carefully considering the trial court’s findings in its order, we conclude that it erred by failing to disqualify DA Willis and her office,” wrote judges Todd Markle and Trenton Brown for the majority. A third judge, Benjamin Land, issued a strongly-worded dissent.
The appeals court’s ruling overturns a March decision from the case’s trial judge, Scott McAfee. The Fulton Superior Court judge ruled that while he didn’t condone Willis’ “tremendous lapse in judgment,” the defense failed to prove the DA had an actual conflict of interest. He instead said that Willis could stay on the election case if Wade stepped aside, which the Marietta attorney did hours later.
The decision is a massive blow to Willis, one of the most recognizable prosecutors in the country who cruised to a second term last month against a relatively inexperienced Republican opponent. It also could be the death knell for the fourth and final case that resulted in criminal charges against Trump after he left office in January 2021.
The decision is not not the final word on the case. Willis is expected to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court of Georgia. The case could also be assigned to a prosecutor from another jurisdiction.
In its ruling, the judges declined a separate request to dismiss the indictment entirely.
A spokesman for the DA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In his dissent, Land said he was “troubled” that the two-judge majority had not deferred to McAfee’s discretion and decision-making after assessing the credibility of witnesses and weighing all the evidence.
“We should not lightly interfere with their work or weaken their discretion by imposing our will because we don’t like the result,” Land wrote, referring generally to trial judges. “Because I am convinced that is what the majority has done in this case, I respectfully dissent.”
What happens next
Should Willis’ office appeal the decision and the state Supreme Court opt to uphold the appeals court’s decision, jurisdiction over the case will shift to a nonpartisan state agency, the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, which must decide whom to assign it to next.It is unclear whether there are other prosecutors around the state who would raise their hand to pick up the election case given the resources and time needed to bring such a complex case to trial. Not only that, but the notoriety and threats that Willis has received over the last several years — she travels with around-the-clock security and as recently as this fall testified at the sentencing of an Alabama man who had threatened her and her family — will likely be further disincentive for many.
The election interference case, which led to felony racketeering charges against Trump and 18 others in August 2023, is not only Willis’ highest profile, but a key part of her legacy. Taking it out of Willis’ hands not only substantially increases the likelihood that it will die before going to trial — but it also constitutes a rebuke of her leadership atop the state’s largest local prosecutorial office.
The disqualification fight has effectively ground the election case to a halt since January and prevented it from going to trial before the presidential election, as prosecutors had initially hoped.
Instead, Willis spent months battling salacious allegations about her personal life. It all culminated at a dramatic hearing in February that featured sworn testimony from Willis and Wade and at times felt like a telenovela.
The decision comes two weeks after the court abruptly canceled Dec. 5 oral arguments without any explanation, taking many of the attorneys involved by surprise. Now it’s clear the judges had made up their minds based solely on legal briefs — and well ahead of their mid-March deadline.
The appeals court is still weighing a separate cross-appeal in the election interference case. The court has until July to decide whether to reinstate, as prosecutors have asked, six criminal charges McAfee dropped from the indictment because they lacked sufficient detail.
who made her do it though? Was this biden or hillarys call?
