Judge rules that prosecutor can continue the Trump Georgia case now that ex-boyfriend resigns

An Atlanta judge ruled Friday that Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis could continue to lead the election interference prosecution of former President Donald J. Trump and his allies in Georgia, but only as her former romantic partner, Nathan J. Wade, retired from the case.

The long-awaited ruling from Fulton Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee struck a middle ground between removing Ms. Willis for a conflict of interest, which attorneys had sought, and her full vindication. The judge sharply criticized Ms. Willis for having a relationship with Mr. Wade, whom she hired as a special prosecutor for the case, calling it a “massive error in judgment.”

Hours after the ruling, Ms Willis said Mr Wade had tendered his resignation and she had accepted it.

Judge McAfee had rejected the defense’s claim that the relationship had created an actual conflict of interest by giving Ms. Willis a financial interest in the case. But he found it had raised “a significant appearance of impropriety” that needed to be addressed.

Disqualifying Ms. Willis and her office from the case was not necessary, the judge said, when “a less drastic and sufficient corrective option is available.” But he concluded that “the prosecution of this case cannot proceed until the state chooses one of two options.” Either Ms. Willis and her office could have stepped aside, including Mr. Wade, or he had to leave.

Ms. Willis and her office did not comment directly on the ruling. But in announcing Mr. Wade’s resignation in a letter, Ms. Willis complimented his professionalism, “as you have endured threats against you and your family, as well as unwarranted attacks in the media and in court on your reputation as a lawyer.”

With delays piling up, the case is unlikely to go to trial before the 2024 presidential election and Trump’s rematch with President Biden.

At the same time, the decision was a setback for Mr. Trump and his 14 co-defendants, as the prosecutor who has followed the case for more than three years remained in place. But Ms. Willis has also left weeks of embarrassing hearings with a bruised reputation that could color the views of a future jury, making convictions more difficult.

Caren Myers Morrison, an associate professor of law at Georgia State University, called the ruling “an extremely fortunate break for the district attorney’s office” because it allowed the case to “get the case back on track next week.” ”

But, she added, the ruling was damaging to Ms. Willis because “it explicitly calls into question her judgment, her professionalism and her integrity.”

The courtroom drama surrounding the relationship between the plaintiffs had in recent weeks overshadowed the underlying facts of the election case itself, which was quickly heading to trial. And it turned the tables on prosecutors, who were forced to take the witness stand and defend themselves against hostile interrogations.

In his ruling, Judge McAfee said Ms. Willis, who had a fiery turn on the stand last month, behaved “unprofessionally” — a rebuke that was all the more remarkable considering that the 34-year-old rookie judge once worked under Ms. Willis at the district attorney’s office.

The statement stood out for its clarity and plain language. In explaining the essence of the problem that Ms. Willis had created by taking outings with a romantic partner who worked for her, Judge McAfee wrote that “an outsider might reasonably believe that the prosecutor did not fully exercise her independent professional judgment from any compromising influence.”

Dismissing Ms. Willis and her office from the case would have caused significant chaos and forced a government agency to find a new prosecutor, who would have had the power to amend or even dismiss the charges.

In his resignation letter, Mr. Wade said he was leaving the prosecutor’s office “in the interests of democracy, in commitment to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible.”

Mr. Trump and his co-defendants could appeal the ruling, as could Ms. Willis, further delaying the proceedings and leaving the case unresolved indefinitely.

Steven H. Sadow, Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer in the Georgia case, said the former president’s legal team would “exercise all available legal options” to continue fighting the case, strongly indicating that his lawyers would try to appeal the order.

Ashleigh Merchant, a lawyer for Michael Roman, one of Trump’s co-defendants, on Friday demanded “justification” for her efforts to have Ms. Willis thrown off the case. The allegations of a romance between the two accusers first emerged in a filing by Ms Merchant in January.

“The judge clearly agreed with the defense that Willis’ actions are the result of her poor judgment,” Ms. Merchant said in a statement, “and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she does not act quickly . to heal her conflict.”

The Republican-led Senate is also investigating the conflict of interest allegations, and lawmakers have given a new oversight committee the authority to investigate and possibly fire the prosecutors.

Judge McAfee’s decision came two days after he threw out six charges in the case against Mr. Trump and his 14 remaining co-defendants, including one related to a phone call Mr. Trump made in early January 2021 to pressure the Georgian Minister of Foreign Affairs. left intact the remainder of the racketeering indictment, which initially included 41 charges.

The charges allege a series of allegations, including a scheme to deploy fake Trump voters in Georgia and steps some defendants took to access voting machines and data in a rural county. Four of the original 19 defendants have already pleaded guilty as part of cooperation agreements, while the rest have pleaded not guilty.

The criminal case in Georgia is one of four cases currently facing Trump across the country. All have been charged with developments in recent weeks that have led to delays, disappointing the former president’s critics who want him to stand trial before November’s general election.

Defense lawyers had argued that the relationship between the two Georgia prosecutors created an untenable conflict of interest because Mr. Wade was paid through a lucrative government contract while also paying, at least in part, for vacations with his boss.

In her January filing, Ms Merchant said Mr Wade and Ms Willis had “personally benefited from this prosecution” at taxpayer expense. Ms Merchant also said Mr Wade was underqualified and argued the entire complaint should be dismissed.

A flurry of lawsuits followed, as well as a number of dramatic public televised hearings that had little to do with the indictment accusing Trump and some of his allies of conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss in Georgia.

In February, Ms. Willis herself took the witness stand and fiercely accused Ms. Merchant of lying, describing the disqualification efforts as an attempt to distract the American public from her case against Mr. Trump.

“You think I’m on trial,” Mrs. Willis said to Mrs. Merchant. Looking at the defense table, she added: “These people are on trial because they tried to steal the 2020 election.”

She acknowledged the existence of a romantic relationship, but she said it began in 2022, after Mr. Wade began working for the district attorney’s office. She also said the physical element of the relationship ended before the racketeering charges were filed in August.

And she insisted she paid for about half of the vacations, but usually reimbursed Mr. Wade in cash.

During the hearings, Mr. Sadow attacked not only the romance and travel but also a speech that Ms. Willis, who is black, gave at an Atlanta church that suggested racism motivated those who questioned her relationship with Mr. Wade took a closer look. which is also black.

Mr. Sadow argued that the speech “created a high likelihood of substantial prejudice against the defendants in the eyes of the public in general, and prospective jurors in Fulton County in particular.”

Over the course of three hearings, lawyers heard from Ms. Willis, Mr. Wade and his former attorney and divorce lawyer Terrence Bradley. Mr Bradley was labeled by lawyers as someone who could establish that the romance began before Ms Willis hired Mr Wade in November 2021.

But the information he offered was muddled. A text message was entered into evidence in which Mr Bradley told Ms Merchant he “absolutely” believed the romance predated Mr Wade’s recruitment. But in the witness statement he said he had no information about the beginning of the relationship, and that he had been speculating when he texted Ms Merchant. The judge said neither party had provided definitive evidence of when the romance began.

Even as Ms. Willis continues to prosecute, the weeks of negative headlines about her relationship with Mr. Wade could influence the jurors who will decide whether Mr. Trump and his co-defendants are guilty of violating Georgia’s racketeering law. other cases. laws.

Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School at Loyola Marymount University, said it appeared that Judge McAfee was “deeply concerned about the integrity of the judicial process and was acutely aware of the need for not only jurors, but also the have public confidence in the integrity of the process.”

Anna Betts reporting contributed.