In a high-profile election-interference case involving former President Trump, both sides are preparing their final arguments over whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should be disqualified due to her personal relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade. After a two-day hearing on the motion to disqualify Willis, the public awaits the next steps.
The next hearing will be an in-camera hearing with Judge Scott McAfee and the defense’s star witness, Terrence Bradley. Bradley’s testimony during the previous hearing was limited due to objections from both sides regarding attorney-client privilege. Anthony Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University, described the information Bradley shared as “basically a dud.”
However, the upcoming closed-door hearing could potentially shed more light on the case. The judge will determine whether Bradley’s answers violate attorney-client privilege and the weight to give any admissible testimony. Following this, a final hearing is expected where both the state and defense will summarize their evidence and present their final arguments.
The case has no clear precedent, and the decision ultimately rests on the standard of ethics Judge McAfee applies. The prosecution argues that an actual conflict of interest needs to be proven, while the defense contends that even an appearance of conflict is enough to disqualify Willis.
Judge McAfee faces the challenge of sifting through the law and the specifics of this case to make a decision. The key questions are whether Willis’ relationship with Wade created a conflict of interest and which legal standard the judge should apply.
Kreis believes that if the judge follows the standard of a concrete conflict of interest, it is unlikely the DA’s office will be kicked off the case based on the evidence presented so far. However, regardless of the outcome, an appeal is highly likely to be filed immediately.
Under Georgia law, defense attorneys can file a “certificate of review” to request permission to appeal the judge’s decision. If granted, the case would go to the Georgia Court of Appeals. If denied, the defense would have to wait until after the trial concludes to bring it to the state appeals court.
While the appeals court has discretion in deciding whether to take up the case, Kreis believes McAfee would grant any appeal due to his methodical approach to the case thus far. McAfee is unlikely to rule from the bench and is expected to provide a detailed ruling with supporting legal memorandum.
Overall, the case continues to unfold, and its outcome will have significant implications. The judge’s decision will determine whether Willis remains on the case or if she will be disqualified, leading to potential appeals and further legal proceedings.
