Appeals court removes accuser Fani Willis from Georgia election case against Trump

ATLANTA (AP) — A state court of appeals Thursday removed Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from Georgia’s election meddling case against Donald Trump and others, but did not dismiss the indictment, leaving the prosecution’s future uncertain.

Citing an “apparent impropriety” by Willis that might not typically warrant such removal, the court said in a 2-1 ruling that “this is the rare case where disqualification is warranted and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings.”

The case against Trump and more than a dozen others had already been largely stalled for months while the Georgia Court of Appeals considered the pre-trial appeal.

The 2-1 ruling from an appeals court panel means it will be up to Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia to find another prosecutor to take over the case, though that could be delayed if Willis decides to appeal to the state Supreme Court and that court agrees to take the case. A judge in March had allowed Willis to stay in the case.

It is the latest legal victory for Trump as he prepares to return to power for a second term, further underscoring how criminal cases that just a year ago threatened to derail Trump’s political career and put him in personal jeopardy now has tipped in his favor.

And he cheered the state court’s ruling, telling Fox News Digital that the case “shouldn’t be allowed to go any further.” The president-elect added, “Everyone should receive an apology, including the wonderful patriots who have been caught up in this for years.”

Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, said the ruling was “well-reasoned and fair.” He said the appeals court “highlighted that Willis’s misconduct created an ‘odor of falsity’ and an appearance of impropriety that could only be cured by disqualification of her and her entire office.”

“This decision puts an end to a politically motivated pursuit of the next president of the United States,” Sadow wrote in an emailed statement.

The development comes weeks after Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith dropped two federal prosecutions against the president-elect, and as sentencing in a separate quiet money case in New York is on hold indefinitely as a result of Trump’s November victory over Democratic President Joe Biden.

Still, the practical consequences for Trump may be minimal given the practical impossibility of trying to pursue a criminal case against a sitting president, regardless of prosecutorial oversight. But there are 14 other defendants who are still facing charges.

Representatives for Willis did not immediately respond to text messages seeking comment on the ruling.

If Willis does not appeal to the state Supreme Court, or if that court upholds Wednesday’s decision or declines to take the case, it will be up to the District Attorney’s Office to find another prosecutor to take over. That can be difficult given the extensive resources needed to prosecute the sprawling and complex case. The prosecutor who would take charge could continue on the path Willis has taken, decide to pursue only some charges or dismiss the case entirely.

The appeals court’s majority opinion, written by Judge Trenton Brown and joined by Judge Todd Markle, said that “the remedy designed by the trial court to prevent a continuing appearance of wrongdoing did nothing to address apparent wrongdoing that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising broad pre-trial discretion as to who to prosecute and what charges to file.”

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Benjamin Land wrote that “the law does not support the result reached by the majority.” Trial court judges, he said, have broad discretion to impose a remedy that fits a situation, and the appellate court should respect that.

“We are here to ensure that the law has been properly applied and to correct harmful legal errors when we see them. It is not our job to second-guess trial judges or to substitute our judgment for theirs,” he wrote.

“Where, as here, a prosecutor has no actual conflict of interest and the trial court, based on the evidence before it, dismisses the allegations of actual impropriety, we have no authority to reverse the trial court’s dismissal of a claim of disqualification. ” he said, arguing that the majority opinion goes against decades of precedent in Georgia.

An Atlanta grand jury indicted Trump and 18 others in August 2023 using the the state law on waste management accusing them of participating in an elaborate scheme to illegally try to overturn Trump’s narrow 2020 presidential loss in Georgia. Four of them have since pleaded guilty after striking deals with prosecutors. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty.

Trump and some of the remaining defendants sought to have Willis and her office removed from the case and have the case dismissed. They claimed that her romantic relationship with Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade created a conflict of interest and that she made inappropriate public statements about the matter.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, the trial judge, ruled that in March no conflict of interest existed that should force Willis off the case. Trump and the others appealed that ruling.

McAfee wrote that the prosecution was “tainted with apparent impropriety.” He said Willis could only stay on the case if Wade left; the special prosecutor submitted his resignation hours later.

The allegations that Willis had improperly benefited from her romance with Wade resulted in a tumultuous few months in the case, as intimate details of Willis and Wade’s personal lives were sent to court in mid-February. Trump and others also argued that public comments Willis made in the wake of the revelation of the relationship unfairly disparaged the defendants and their attorneys.

The allegations against Willis first surfaced in a motion filed in early January by Ashleigh Merchant, an attorney for former Trump campaign staffer and former White House aide Michael Roman. The motion alleged that Willis and Wade engaged in an inappropriate romantic relationship and that Willis paid Wade large sums of money for his work and then benefited when he paid for lavish vacations.

Merchant said in a statement Thursday that “we regret that Ms. WIllis did not do the right thing and voluntarily recuse herself when Mr. Roman raised the issue because failure to do so put Judge McAfee in an untenable position.”

Willis and Wade acknowledged the relationship but said they did not start dating until spring 2022. Wade was hired in November 2021 and their romance ended in summer 2023, they said. They also testified that they split travel and other expenses roughly equally, with Willis often paying expenses or reimbursing Wade in cash.

Speaking in a historically black church in Atlanta shortly after the affair was revealed, Willis defended Wade’s qualifications and his own management of his office. Defense lawyers said the speech included a series of inappropriate and prejudicial comments against the defendants and their legal team, poisoning any potential jurors against them.

____

Associated Press writers Eric Tucker in Washington and Jill Colvin in New York contributed to this report.