By Sam Gringlus
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her office cannot continue prosecuting the Georgia election interference case involving President-elect Donald Trump, the Georgia Court of Appeals has ruled.
However, the court declined to dismiss the case itself. Fulton County prosecutors quickly notified the court that they intend to appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court.
“While this is the rare case in which DA Willis and her office must be disqualified due to a significant appearance of impropriety, we cannot conclude that the record also supports the imposition of the extreme sanction of dismissal of the indictment under the appropriate standard,” the appeals court judges wrote. The three-judge panel voted 2-1 to disqualify Willis.
The case has been thrown into disarray since Willis admitted to a personal relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she hired for the case.
A trial court had ruled in March 2024 that Willis could remain on the case amid the misconduct allegations only if Wade resigned his appointment. Several defendants appealed that ruling and the case has largely been halted since this summer.
Trump is unlikely to face trial until 2029, if at all. Trump’s lawyers have separately asked the courts to dismiss his charges entirely now that he is president-elect.
The Georgia case represents the last remaining criminal charges against Trump.
Whatever happens to Trump’s Georgia charges, the 14 other remaining co-defendants could face trial in the sweeping racketeering case as soon as late next year.
If the Georgia Supreme Court ultimately takes up the case and upholds the decision, it would fall to the director of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia to appoint a new prosecutor. That prosecutor would have the discretion to decide whether to continue the case.
Trump’s Georgia attorney Steve Sadow wrote in a statement that the appeals court ruling was “well-reasoned.” He wrote: “As the Court rightfully noted, only the remedy of disqualification will suffice to restore public confidence.”
The district attorney’s office has not responded to a request for comment.
A romantic relationship at the center of misconduct allegations
The case focuses on efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn Georgia’s 2020 election result by pressuring state officials and election workers, submitting a slate of false electors and attempting to tamper with sensitive voting equipment. Four have pleaded guilty.
Then in January 2024, co-defendant Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign official, accused Willis of misconduct that threatened to derail the case. Roman alleged that Willis enriched herself by taking fancy vacations with Wade, funded by his compensation for the prosecution. Willis and Wade testified in front of the judge, saying she paid her own way on the trips or reimbursed him in cash for her share of the expenses.
Fulton Superior Judge Scott McAfee ruled in March that Willis’ romantic relationship with Wade created the appearance of a conflict of interest, but did not require her disqualification.
McAfee wrote that, “an outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist.”
The Court of Appeals was initially scheduled to consider the appeal in December, before abruptly cancelling oral arguments not long after Trump won a second term.
Trump had faced four separate prosecutions. He was convicted in New York for charges related to hush money payments, and a judge recently ruled that Trump can’t claim presidential immunity to overturn that conviction. But sentencing in the New York case has been delayed, and the two federal cases against Trump were dropped after he won election last month.
In the Georgia case, a key legal question in the proceedings has been whether state law requires the disqualification of a district attorney only for an actual conflict of interest or merely just the appearance of impropriety.
“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,” concluded Judge Trenton Brown, writing for the majority. “The remedy crafted by the trial court to prevent an ongoing appearance of impropriety did nothing to address the appearance of impropriety that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring.”
“While we recognize that an appearance of impropriety generally is not enough to support disqualification, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings,” Brown continued.
Judge Todd Markle concurred. Brown and Markle were both appointees of former Republican Gov. Nathan Deal. Judge Benjamin Land, appointed by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, dissented.
“For at least the last 43 years, our appellate courts have held that an appearance of impropriety, without an actual conflict of interest or actual impropriety, provides no basis for the reversal of a trial court’s denial of a motion to disqualify,” Land wrote.
The decision caps a tumultuous year for Willis. At the onset of 2024, Willis was seen as a rising star on the national stage, as she spearheaded not only the indictment of a former president, but also pushed ahead on other high-profile cases, like a racketeering case involving rapper Young Thug. In May, she defeated a challenger in the Democratic primary.
But as the year wore on, those marquee cases stumbled or fell apart.
McAfee has quashed several counts in the Georgia election interference indictment, but 32 felony counts still remain.