A Georgia appeals court has ruled that Fulton County DA Fani Willis must be disqualified from the Donald Trump election interference prosecution, striking a potentially lethal blow to the case.
The court reversed a lower court ruling that allowed Willis to remain on the case despite her sensational affair with prosecutor Nathan Wade, after Wade stepped down from his post in her office.
Ruling in a 2-1 opinion, it said she was ‘wholly disqualified from this case,’ and pointed to ‘a significant appearance of impropriety.’
The ruling overturns Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee’s decision that allowed Willis and her team to remain despite the affair as long as Wade left his post as her lead prosecutor – even as the judge pointed to the ‘odor of mendacity’ lingered around her case in light of the stunning revelations.
The ruling did not toss out the case itself, although the decision raises barrier that legal experts immediately called potentially lethal.
Another team of prosecutors would have to come in from another county to bring the case, at a time when the other criminal cases against Trump have collapsed after his election to the presidency.
The case featured stunning testimony by Fulton County DA Fani Willis, who brought the charges against Trump and codefendants. A Georgia appeals court ruled that Willis must be disqualified from the case
‘It’s not coming back. It’s over,’ said CNN legal commentator Elie Honig immediately after the news broke.
‘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 time when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring,’ the court ruled.
The court called it ‘the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings.’
Willis’ affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, a member of her team, helped blow up the case. The appeals court pointed to a ‘significant appearance of impropriety’
The charges brought Trump’s infamous mugshot
The decision is just the latest legal break going Trump’s way. In November, Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought a similar federal election interference case in Washington, D.C. , moved to have that case dropped. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan soon agreed.
Trump regularly mocked and attacked Willis throughout the case.
The prosecution is what brought Trump’s infamous mugshot after he was first charged – something Trump soon used to advantage by marketing it on his campaign website.
A grand jury charged Trump and 18 codefendants in August 2023 of violating the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act as part of the election overturn effort.
The 98-page inictment charged efforts to pressure election workers and featured Trump’s infamous phone call to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to ‘find 11,780 votes.’
But the case soon took a stunning U-turn, after defense lawyers uncovered stunning evidence that Willis and Wade had been carrying on an affair.
Willis herself stormed into the courtroom during an evidentiary hearing to defend herself.
The court was soon reviewing texts and documentation that established their affair as well as out-of-town trips.
The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee summoned Wade to provide closed-door testimony about the case and the affair in October.
Lawyer Ashleigh Merchant, who first brought forth the astonishing affair allegations while representing codefendant Mike Roman, told DailyMail.com: ‘We are very pleased the court of appeals agreed with Mr. Roman and the other defendants that Ms. Willis should not have been allowed to prosecute this case.’
‘We regret that Ms. Willis did not do the right thing and voluntarily recuse herself when Mr. Roman raised the issue because failing to do so put Judge McAfee in an untenable position. This failure of judgment is the exact reason Mr. Roman was forced to move to disqualify her in the first place, so we are thankful that the court agreed she should not be allowed to prosecute this case any further.’
