Fani Willis is holding the Trump case, but more turbulence lies ahead

After revelations about Fani T. Willis’ romance with an underling took the criminal case against Donald J. Trump in Georgia into a two-month detour worthy of a soap opera, a judge’s ruling Friday resolved a major cliffhanger. Ms. Willis could continue to prosecute the case as long as her ex-boyfriend withdrew from it.

But the firing just hours later of the ex-boyfriend, Nathan J. Wade, who hired Ms. Willis as special prosector, only ended the case. A new and complicated set of problems lies ahead for Ms. Willis, and for one of the most important state criminal cases in American history.

“Her troubles are far from over,” Clark D. Cunningham, a professor of law and ethics at Georgia State University, said in an email Friday.

Defense efforts to disqualify Ms. Willis began in early January, turning the case on its head and making it unlikely that a trial would happen before the November rematch between Mr. Trump and President Biden. Any attempt to appeal Friday’s ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee could delay the case further.

The Republicans smelled blood. The Republican lawmakers who dominate Georgia politics have created new avenues to investigate Ms. Willis, which could potentially lead to her removal from office. And last week, a young lawyer named Courtney Kramer, a former intern in the Trump White House, announced that she would run against Ms. Willis in this year’s race for district attorney.

While Ms. Kramer’s campaign is unlikely to succeed in heavily Democratic Fulton County, it could intensify criticism of Ms. Willis and the case, which accuses Trump and some of his allies of conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss in Georgia to undo.

Mr. Trump has made Ms. Willis’ problems a recurring topic of conversation at rallies. One of his closest allies in Congress, Representative Jim Jordan, is chairman of the House Judiciary committee, which is investigating Ms. Willis and her prosecution of the former president. On Thursday, Mr. Jordan sent a letter to Mrs. Willis threatened to invoke contempt of Congress proceedings against her if she did not turn over certain documents related to her office’s use of federal funds.

All of these attacks could help cast doubt on the prosecutor and her case in the minds of prospective jurors.

As pressure has mounted, Ms. Willis has responded with fierce resistance. Shortly after news of the relationship broke, she gave a speech at a black church in Atlanta, calling herself “flawed, stubborn and imperfect” but also suggesting that her critics were motivated by racism.

Just last week, at an International Women’s Day event, she lashed out at “idiots” who criticized her and mispronounced her name as “Fanny” – it’s FAH-no – and told how a friend had recently asked if she regretted to become a public prosecutor.

“Are you kidding me?” Ms. Willis remembered responding. “I’m the best prosecutor this county has ever had.”

Mr Cunningham said that even after Friday’s ruling, Ms Willis and her entire office could still be removed from the case if an appeal were successful, pushing the case into new areas of uncertainty and potential chaos. The judge, he noted, pointed to lingering questions about whether Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade “testified untruthfully,” even saying in his ruling that “an odor of mendacity lingers.”

“Trump and his co-defendants will certainly appeal,” Mr. Cunningham said in his email, “and Judge McAfee’s order gives them sufficient basis to argue before the appeals court that removing Wade alone is an inadequate remedy is.”

It is not clear to what extent Mr. Wade’s dismissal will worsen matters. Ms. Willis has described him as an old trusted ally. And as manager of Trump’s prosecution team since November 2021, he has a wealth of institutional knowledge that would have been particularly useful if the case dragged on for months or even years.

At the same time, there is no evidence that Mr. Wade, a lawyer and former municipal court judge from suburban Atlanta, ever handled a major political corruption case before Ms. Willis hired him. Indeed, his limited experience was a key argument in the original motion to disqualify Ms. Willis.

Ashleigh Merchant, the attorney who filed the motion, alleged that Ms. Willis hired an underqualified boyfriend, paid him handsomely from the public purse and then profited from vacations she and Mr. Wade took together.

A more serious problem for Ms. Willis and the case could lie in the new state commission that has the power to investigate and fire elected prosecutors.

The commission, made up of Republican appointees, was created last year but has been stymied by legal challenges that the Legislature addressed in a recent measure. It will likely face a lawsuit before it can begin operations.

A second group, made up mostly of Republican senators and dedicated to investigating Ms. Willis, has already begun holding hearings. Its leader, Senator Bill Cowsert, has said the group does not want to engage in a “witch hunt.” But it has the power to subpoena documents and witnesses, and last week it called Ms Merchant as its first witness.

Before Ms. Merchant’s motion to disqualify Ms. Willis, the prosecution had obtained pleas from four of the original 19 defendants in the sprawling racketeering case. Presumably, any talk of additional deals was halted as the defendants waited to see whether Ms. Willis and her firm would be dismissed from the case. It is unclear whether the events of the past two months will make further plea talks less likely.

The best news for Ms. Willis on Friday was that Judge McAfee declined to force her out of the Trump case. But she also won smaller victories, as the judge refused to punish her for other actions. Among them was the speech she gave in church.

Steven H. Sadow, Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer in Georgia, had described the speech as “provocative and inflammatory, extrajudicial racist remarks” intended to “publicly expose and reprimand the defendants.” He argued that they were disturbing enough to disqualify Ms. Willis and her office and dismiss the charges.

Judge McAfee declined to go that far, although he did call Ms. Willis’ statements “legally inappropriate.” And he suggested he was open to issuing a silence order that would prevent Ms Willis from discussing the matter publicly in future.

But will keeping Ms. Willis quiet help the case as it drags on? Like Mr Trump, she does not shy away from the spotlight. And like Mr. Trump, her talkative, combative nature has won her enthusiastic fans.

In December, a few weeks before the relationship came to light, Ms. Willis received applause and cheers when she spoke at an event in her honor in New York.

“A lot of people are angry,” she said, “but I’m still here.”