Donald Trump’s lawyers believe they have found the “death sentence” for Fani Willis

Donald Trump's lawyers believe they have sounded the death knell for Fani Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia.

In a new court filing Monday, Trump attorney Steven Sadow argued that Willis' election interference lawsuit against the former president should be dismissed, in part because he believes Willis was biased against Trump.

The context

Willis, a Democrat, is leading the prosecution in the case alleging Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, a swing state that narrowly supported President Joe Biden four years ago. Her investigation is focusing on his phone call with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump urged him to “find” enough votes to sway the election in his favor, as well as an alleged plot to submit a false slate of pro-Trump electors to the Electoral College.

Willis' handling of the case has come under scrutiny. She was criticized for a speech at an Atlanta church in January in which she suggested she had been attacked because of her race. Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case, called the speech “inappropriate” but ruled it was not enough to remove her from the case.

What we know

Sadow wrote that he had found a “death sentence” for Willis, citing an opinion by former Georgia Supreme Court Justice Harold Nelson Hill that he believed would support dismissal of the case.

“[B]Before a trial, the court should be aware of the possibility of prejudice to the defendant. I believe that a court should disqualify the prosecutor if his continued presence in the case would create a reasonable possibility of prejudice to the defendant,” Hill wrote.

“A reasonable standard of potential for bias would strictly protect defendants,” Hill continued. “It would not require proof of actual or probable harm. Rather, the court would focus on the possibility of an unfair trial. However, this rule would place the burden on defendants to prove a real, rather than imagined, possibility of bias.”

Hill's opinion was based on a 1981 case. Sadow argued that the state had improperly relied on a dissenting opinion from the 1988 Georgia Supreme Court case. Williams v. the State.

“Here, even Hill's pretrial standard of 'reasonable potential for prejudice'
easily met,” Sadow wrote. “With nationwide defamatory coverage on every available network, plaintiffs have demonstrated that there is not just a 'real chance' but a substantial likelihood of unfair treatment during the trial process,” he wrote.

Views

Willis has not responded to the lawsuit. She has previously denied that her past comments revealed bias against Trump.

In an earlier brief, her office had written: “The District Attorney expressed no personal opinion as to the guilt of any defendant, nor did she discuss the actual merits of the case at hand. She 'did not mention any defendant by name' and 'did not address the merits of the crimes charged in order to place the trial itself in the court of public opinion.'”

Newsweek has emailed Willis' office seeking comment on Sadow's filing.

What's next

It is still unclear if and when a trial will take place, but it is unlikely that the case will even go to trial before the presidential election in November.

Update 08/26/24, 1:32 PM ET: This story has been updated with additional information and background.