A hearing has been scheduled by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee to address the potential disqualification of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the state’s election interference case against former President Donald Trump. The hearing, set for Thursday, will primarily focus on the details of Willis’ personal relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she hired for the case. The revelation of their alleged romantic involvement has raised concerns about the impartiality of the prosecution and could undermine public confidence in the case.
The defense attorney representing one of the co-defendants has argued that the relationship creates a conflict of interest and has requested the dismissal of the indictment against Trump, as well as the prohibition of Willis, Wade, and their offices from further involvement in the case. Willis, in her response, acknowledged the existence of a “personal relationship” but maintained that it has no bearing on the serious criminal charges being pursued. She urged the judge to dismiss the motions seeking her disqualification without a hearing.
Judge McAfee, citing the possibility of a disqualification based on the allegations, emphasized the need for an evidentiary hearing to establish the facts surrounding the relationship. The highly anticipated hearing, which will be streamed live on the judge’s YouTube channel and by news outlets, may extend into Friday.
Former President Trump, who is facing multiple criminal prosecutions and is currently running for the White House again, has seized upon the revelation of the relationship to cast doubt on Willis’ motivations and the legitimacy of the case. Other Republicans have also used the claims to call for investigations or sanctions against Willis, who is an elected Democrat seeking reelection this year.
The motion filed by Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign staffer and White House aide, alleges that Willis and Wade were romantically involved when she hired him in November 2021 to investigate potential crimes related to Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss in Georgia. The investigation led to the indictment of Trump and 18 others in August, accusing them of participating in an illegal scheme to keep Trump in office. Four individuals charged have already pleaded guilty, while Trump and the remaining 14 have pleaded not guilty.
Roman’s motion also questions Wade’s qualifications for the job, asserting that there is no evidence of his prior experience in prosecuting felonies or handling racketeering cases. Additionally, Roman claims that Willis personally benefited from the arrangement, alleging that Wade used the funds he received for expensive vacations, including cruises and trips to various destinations.
Willis defended Wade’s qualifications and her decision to hire him during a speech at a historic Black church in Atlanta, without addressing the allegations of a relationship. It took nearly three weeks for Willis to acknowledge the “personal relationship” in a court filing, accompanied by a sworn statement from Wade stating that their relationship began in 2022, after he was hired as a special prosecutor. Wade’s statement also asserts that travel expenses were divided equally between them and that Willis received no personal financial gain from his position.
During Thursday’s hearing, McAfee intends to determine the nature and timeline of the relationship between Willis and Wade, as well as any personal benefits that may have been conveyed as a result. Ashleigh Merchant, Roman’s attorney, has subpoenaed several individuals, including Bradley, Wade’s former business partner, who is expected to testify about the alleged relationship. Willis has sought to quash these subpoenas, arguing that they serve a narrative rather than a legal purpose and that Bradley’s knowledge is protected by attorney-client privilege.
Aware of the potentially sensitive nature of the details that may arise, Judge McAfee has expressed his willingness to intervene if any harassment or undue embarrassment occurs during the hearing. He emphasized that arguments regarding Wade’s qualifications are irrelevant, as long as an attorney possesses a valid license to practice law.
