Trump and co-defendants appeal ruling keeping Fani Willis on Georgia election case
Lawyers for the former president and eight of his co-defendants argue prosecutor’s removal from case is critical for judicial system
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Donald Trump and eight of his co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case have appealed a judge’s decision to keep Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on the case.
In a filing submitted to the Georgia Court of Appeals on Friday afternoon, attorneys for the former president and his co-defendants claimed Ms Willis should not be allowed to preside over the case and allowing her to do so would result in errors in each trial and public mistrust in the judicial system.
Earlier this month, Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee decided Ms Willis and her office could continue pursuing the case against Mr Trump and his co-defendants after days of contentious hearings, so long as her former partner and the prosecutor on the case, Nathan Wade, resigned.
Mr Wade stepped down shortly after the ruling, allowing the case to move forward.
In deciding Ms Willis could remain on the case, Judge McAfee also issued a certification of immediate review to allow the defendants to appeal before they go to trial later this year.
Among their arguments, defence attorneys claim that “Nothing in the law—anywhere—says that the remedy for an appearance of impropriety is the disqualification of one apparently conflicted lawyer but not another.”
It is the latest effort by the defendants to get Ms Willis removed from the case accusing them of violating state racketeering laws among a slew of other criminal charges.
Earlier this year, defence attorneys raised complaints against Ms Willis for having a romantic relationship with Mr Wade, who she employed as a special prosecutor in the case. It resulted in a highly-publicised hearing that sought to embarrass Ms Willis and Mr Wade as well as remove both from prosecuting the case.
Though no state laws had been violated, the ethical implications of Ms Willis’s and Mr Wade’s romantic relationship led to concerns from Judge McAfee, which he outlined in his ruling.
“This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing,” Judge McAfee wrote.
Defence attorneys noted that Judge McAfee’s decision lacked appellate guidance in their argument to the Georgia appeals court.
They also suggested that Ms Willis was not “impartial” or “disinterested” as, what they claim, most prosecutors should be to maintain integrity.
Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows, Jeffery Clark, Robert Cheeley, Michael Roman, David Shafer, Harrison Floyd and Cathy Latham joined Mr Trump’s appeal.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments