Co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case against former President Trump have filed appeals to the Georgia Court of Appeals, seeking to have Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis disqualified from the prosecution. Last week, the appeals court agreed to hear the case, which alleges that Willis had an “improper” affair with special counsel Nathan Wade and may have benefited financially from it.
Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Cathy Latham, and Michael Roman all filed their notices of appeal Monday, joining former Georgia GOP head David Shafer in kicking off the briefing processes before the court.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled in March that Wade had to be removed from the case to prevent Willis from being disqualified in the sweeping racketeering case against Trump.
Trump and several co-defendants alleged that Willis and Wade were romantically involved prior to his hiring and that she financially benefited from the relationship. Both Willis and Wade denied those allegations.
Judge McAfee allowed the defense to appeal his ruling, and the appeals court announced last week that they will hear the defense’s case to still have Willis disqualified.
“President Trump looks forward to presenting interlocutory arguments to the Georgia Court of Appeals as to why the case should be dismissed and Fulton County DA Willis should be disqualified for her misconduct in this unjustified, unwarranted political persecution,” Trump lawyer Steve Sadow said in a statement.
A court date has not yet been set.
In March, Judge McAfee ruled that the defendants “failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest in this case through her personal relationship and recurring travels with her lead prosecutor.”
However, he also noted “a significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team — an appearance that must be removed through the State’s selection of one of two options,” adding that Willis and her whole office can choose to step aside, or Wade can withdraw from the case.
Wade subsequently resigned from his post as special prosecutor.
The co-defendants had alleged that Willis benefited financially by hiring Wade because they were in a pre-existing relationship when he was hired in 2021 and would vacation together. Both Wade and Willis denied they were in a romantic relationship prior to his hiring and that the couple would split the costs of their shared travels. Willis said she reimbursed Wade for her share of the trips in cash.
In his March order, McAfee said while Willis’ “reimbursement practice” was “unusual and the lack of any documentary corroboration understandably concerning,” he ultimately decided that the defendants did not present “sufficient evidence” that expenses weren’t “roughly divided evenly.”
He also said that “the evidence demonstrated that the financial gain flowing from her relationship with Wade was not a motivating factor on the part of the District Attorney to indict and prosecute this case.”
In February, Judge McAfee held a two-day evidentiary hearing, when the defense, led by attorney Ashley Merchant, set out to expose a money trail that would mean Willis has a conflict of interest in the case against Trump and should be disqualified.
“[T]he Court finds that the record made at the evidentiary hearing established that the District Attorney’s prosecution is encumbered by an appearance of impropriety,” McAfee wrote in his order. “As the case moves forward, reasonable members of the public could easily be left to wonder whether the financial exchanges have continued resulting in some form of benefit to the District Attorney, or even whether the romantic relationship has resumed.”
“Put differently, an outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist,” he said.
When the defense in March submitted a joint motion for a Certificate of Immediate Review, McAfee said that his Order on the Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and Disqualify the Fulton County District Attorney issued March 15 “is of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had” and allowed the defendants to ask the Georgia appeals court for an opportunity to appeal, which the court granted on Wednesday.
