Georgia Supreme Court Tosses Fani Willis’s Last Bid To Prosecute Trump
The Georgia Supreme Court on Tuesday ended Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s bid to remain on the election interference prosecution against former President Donald Trump and his allies, issuing a 4–3 decision that leaves the high-profile case in limbo.
The justices declined to review a lower court’s ruling that disqualified Willis over what it called a “significant appearance of impropriety” tied to her romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, a top prosecutor she had appointed to the case.
This decision effectively halts the sprawling racketeering prosecution brought by Willis against Trump and more than a dozen associates for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. Trump and most defendants have pleaded not guilty.
Future of the Case Uncertain
While Georgia’s Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council could assign a new prosecutor to take over the case, that process could take months, leaving the matter stalled indefinitely.
Willis, in a statement to The Hill, said that although she disagrees with the court’s decision, she accepts it.
“I hope that whoever is assigned to handle the case will have the courage to do what the evidence and the law demand,” Willis said, adding that her office would turn over case materials to the council.
Trump Team Applauds Decision
Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, Steve Sadow, called the decision correct and overdue.
“Willis’ misconduct during the investigation and prosecution of President Trump was egregious and she deserved nothing less than disqualification. This proper decision should bring an end to the wrongful political, lawfare persecutions of the President,” Sadow said.
How the Case Unraveled
The case began to unravel after revelations that Willis was romantically involved with Wade, whom she had hired to help lead the prosecution. A trial judge ruled that either Wade or Willis would have to leave the case; Wade resigned. But an appeals court later ruled that the “appearance of impropriety” meant neither could continue.
Court Says Broader Issue May Be Revisited
Justice Andrew Pinson, explaining the decision not to review Willis’s appeal, noted the public scrutiny surrounding the case and acknowledged the broader legal question at stake.
“If this question — whether conduct creating an appearance of impropriety alone is grounds for disqualifying a prosecutor — is presented by future cases, we may well need to take it up in one of them,” Pinson said.
However, Pinson added that this particular case did not meet the threshold for review because the appeals ruling was “case-specific.”
“But, in my view, that possibly cert-worthy question is not presented by this case, at least not as it appears before this Court,” he said.
