Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on Tuesday lost her bid to get back on the Georgia election interference case against President Trump — who celebrated by calling her a “disaster.”
The embattled prosecutor was booted from the high-profile case in December by the Georgia Court of Appeals, which cited the “appearance of impropriety” over her affair with the special prosecutor Nathan Wade leading the case.
Georgia’s top court said Tuesday that it would not consider reversing a lower court’s ruling.
Trump cheered the decision on the White House lawn just before he departed for the UK – arguing Willis should be prosecuted.
“Well, that was a great decision. It was a rigged case to start off with. It’s great. The court just ruled that she is a disaster. She’s a disaster with her boyfriend,” he said in reference to Wade.
“She should be prosecuted,” he said of Willis, who has not been charged with any crimes.
“What she did to people, forget about me, what Fani Willis did to innocent people, to patriots, what she did to them by indicting them and destroying them, she should be put in jail,” he claimed. “She’s a criminal. Fani Willis is a criminal.”
A lawyer for Trump, Steve Sadow, gave a more measured response following the court decision, stating the state’s Supreme Court made the right call.
“Willis’ misconduct during the investigation and prosecution of President Trump was egregious and she deserved nothing less than disqualification,” Sadow said. “This proper decision should bring an end to the wrongful political, lawfare persecutions of the President.”
The Peach State’s highest court declined to review the case in a 4-3 vote; one judge didn’t participate, and one judge was disqualified.
The next step would be for the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia to figure out another prosecutor to take the case, but it’s unclear what could happen from there.
The new prosecutor could follow Willis’ path, focus on only some charges or throw the case aside all together.
The chances of Trump facing prosecution are virtually zero since he’s president, but other defendants could still languish in legal trouble.
Trump and 18 others were indicted in 2023 in connection with an alleged scheme to illegally overturn Trump’s narrow 2020 loss in Georgia to Joe Biden under anti-racketeering laws.
“While I disagree with the decision of the Georgia Court of Appeals and the Georgia Supreme Court’s divided decision not to review it, I respect the legal process and the courts,” Willis told The Post in a statement.
“Accordingly, my office will make the case file and evidence available to the Prosecuting Attorneys Council for use in the ongoing litigation. I hope that whoever is assigned to handle the case will have the courage to do what the evidence and the law demand.”
The slim majority decision penned by Justice Andrew Pinson said the factors leading to Willis’ ouster were so specific and rare that the state’s high court shouldn’t take on the appeal and ultimately set a new legal precedent.
“Appellate decisions addressing attempts to disqualify prosecutors are few and far between, and only a handful of those addressed a claim that a prosecutor must be disqualified based even in part on conduct that created an appearance of impropriety,” Pinson wrote.
Still, the ruling appeared to acknowledge that prosecutors should be held to a higher standard than private lawyers.
In a blistering dissenting opinion, Justice Carla Wong McMillian said the question of whether a prosecutor can be disqualified simply for the appearance of impropriety is one that “affects every single active lawyer in the State of Georgia.”
Willis’ relationship with Wade threw the case into disarray last year.
Wade made a stunning $654,000 from the special prosecutor’s gig, and faced accusations that he spent some of that salary on lavish gifts and trips with his boss at the time, Willis.
Initially, a trial judge ruled either Willis or Wade had to go in order for the Fulton District Attorney’s Office to keep the case, leading to Wade’s exit.
Trump was entangled in four criminal prosecutions during his time away from the White House, including two federal ones led by special prosecutor Jack Smith that were scuttled after Trump won the election last November.
He was convicted on 34 counts in his hush money case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, but didn’t receive a punishment.
What specific evidence led the court to find an “improper appearance of conflict” despite not disqualifying Fani Willis?
Table of Contents
- 1. What specific evidence led the court to find an “improper appearance of conflict” despite not disqualifying Fani Willis?
- 2. Fani Willis Denied Appeal in Trump’s Georgia Election Interference Case
- 3. The Ruling and its Implications for the georgia RICO Case
- 4. key Arguments and the Court’s Reasoning
- 5. What Happens Next: Timeline and Potential Outcomes
- 6. Impact on the Broader Legal Landscape: Election Interference Cases
- 7. Understanding the Georgia RICO Law
Fani Willis Denied Appeal in Trump’s Georgia Election Interference Case
The Ruling and its Implications for the georgia RICO Case
On September 16, 2025, the Georgia Court of Appeals denied Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s appeal regarding the disqualification motion filed by Donald Trump and several co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case. This ruling centers around allegations of a conflict of interest stemming from Willis’s romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade. The core of the defense’s argument was that Willis improperly benefited from the prosecution, specifically through Wade’s financial gains.
The appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision, but with a crucial nuance. While the court found evidence of an improper appearance of conflict, it did not disqualify Willis entirely.Instead,the court mandated the removal of Wade from the case. This distinction is meaningful, allowing Willis to continue leading the prosecution, but requiring a change in special counsel.
key Arguments and the Court’s Reasoning
The defense team, led by attorneys for Trump and others indicted in the sprawling RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) case, argued that Willis’s relationship with wade created an ethical breach and compromised the integrity of the prosecution. They presented evidence of travel expenses and financial benefits allegedly accruing to Wade as a result of his position.
Here’s a breakdown of the key arguments:
* conflict of Interest: the central claim was that Willis’s personal relationship with wade created a conflict, as she allegedly benefited financially from his employment.
* Appearance of Impropriety: Even without direct financial gain, the defense argued the appearance of impropriety undermined public confidence in the justice system.
* RICO statute: The prosecution is built upon Georgia’s RICO Act, a powerful law typically used to dismantle organized crime. The defense attempted to portray the case as a politically motivated overreach of this statute.
The court acknowledged the evidence presented regarding the relationship and Wade’s financial benefits. However, it steadfast that disqualifying Willis entirely would be too drastic. The court reasoned that the alleged impropriety was specific to Wade’s involvement and could be remedied by his removal. This ruling highlights the delicate balance between ethical considerations and the pursuit of justice in high-profile cases.
What Happens Next: Timeline and Potential Outcomes
With Wade removed, Fani Willis now faces the task of appointing a new special prosecutor to lead the case. This process could take several weeks or months, potentially delaying the trial.
Here’s a projected timeline:
- appointment of New Special Counsel (September – October 2025): Willis will need to identify and secure a qualified attorney to take over Wade’s role. This requires vetting, negotiation, and formal appointment.
- Briefing and Legal Challenges (October – November 2025): The defense is highly likely to challenge the appointment of the new special counsel, potentially leading to further legal battles.
- Pre-Trial Motions and Finding (November 2025 – January 2026): Ongoing pre-trial motions and the exchange of evidence will continue.
- Potential Trial Date (February 2026 or later): A trial date is unlikely to be set before early 2026, and could be further delayed depending on the outcome of any additional legal challenges.
The potential outcomes remain varied:
* Trial Proceeding: The case moves forward with the new special counsel, potentially leading to a trial and verdicts.
* Further Appeals: The defense could appeal the Court of Appeals’ decision, potentially escalating the case to the Georgia Supreme Court.
* Plea Bargains: The defendants could attempt to negotiate plea bargains with the prosecution.
* Dismissal: While less likely, the case could be dismissed if significant legal hurdles remain insurmountable.
Impact on the Broader Legal Landscape: Election Interference Cases
This ruling has implications beyond the specifics of the Georgia case. It underscores the importance of ethical conduct for prosecutors and the potential for conflicts of interest to derail high-profile investigations.
* Prosecutorial Ethics: the case has sparked a national debate about the ethical obligations of prosecutors, particularly in politically sensitive cases.
* RICO Act Scrutiny: The use of the RICO Act in election interference cases is likely to face increased scrutiny.
* political Polarization: The case remains highly politicized, and the ruling is highly likely to fuel further division.
Understanding the Georgia RICO Law
Georgia’s RICO Act, officially known as the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, is a powerful legal tool designed to combat organized crime. It allows prosecutors to target not just individual criminals, but entire criminal enterprises. In the context of the Trump Georgia case,the prosecution alleges
