In Fulton County, Georgia, justice has taken a backseat to impropriety — or at least that’s the conclusion one might draw from the Georgia Court of Appeals’ recent ruling. District attorney Fani Willis has been disqualified from her much-hyped Trump election interference case due to what the court described as a “significant appearance of impropriety.”  And what an appearance it is — a tangled web of personal relationships, questionable financial arrangements, and prosecutorial antics that could make the Fyre Festival organizers look above board.

A “Significant Appearance of Impropriety”

The appellate court’s decision minced no words in describing the flaws in Willis’s conduct.  The court found that her decision to supervise and keep special assistant district attorney Nathan Wade as lead prosecutor — while engaging in a romantic relationship with him — “impacts more than a mere ‘nebulous’ public interest because it concerns a public prosecutor.”

Willis’s and Wade’s financial entanglements further muddied the waters.  The court documented an impressive travel itinerary for Willis and Wade: a trip to Aruba, two Caribbean cruises, Miami, Belize, and Napa Valley.  Their wanderlust didn’t stop there; the duo also embarked on day trips crisscrossing Tennessee, Alabama, South Carolina, North Carolina, and even other parts of Georgia.  All of this raised significant questions about professionalism and judgment, as the trips were partly funded by Wade while Willis maintained authority over his contract.

Why It Matters

Willis’s actions didn’t just create bad optics; they struck at the heart of her role as a public prosecutor.  The court noted that prosecutors are entrusted with immense discretion — deciding whom to prosecute, what charges to bring, and when to exercise restraint.  With that power comes the expectation of impartiality and integrity, expectations that were profoundly undermined by Willis’s behavior.

This is especially critical in a high-profile case such as this one, where Willis actively sought the spotlight, basking in the national attention even as she approved and kept her questionable arrangement with Mr. Wade.  The result?  That unmistakable “odor of mendacity” has poisoned not just the public perception of this prosecution, but its foundation, casting a shadow over every decision made under her watch.

A Wake-Up Call for Prosecutorial Ethics

The appellate court’s decision to disqualify Willis and her office is rare but entirely proper under the circumstances.  As the court noted, “an investigation of this significance, garnering the public attention it necessarily does and touching so many political nerves in our society, cannot be burdened by legitimate doubts about the District Attorney’s motives.”

Prosecutors are granted significant discretion to ensure that justice is served, but with that discretion comes the expectation of impartiality and integrity.  Willis’s actions, by contrast, created reasonable doubt about whether her decisions were motivated by personal interests rather than justice.

Lessons Learned?

For now, the Trump case will continue without Willis, but this sordid chapter of lawfare against him seems to be approaching a just end.

Fulton County faces the daunting task of rebuilding trust in its justice system.  Whether it succeeds remains to be seen.

The Georgia Court of Appeals deserves credit for taking a stand in this case.  By disqualifying Willis, the court has sent a clear message: public prosecutors must avoid even the appearance of exploiting their positions for personal gain, whether financial or otherwise.  This ruling also serves as a cautionary tale for other ambitious prosecutors: if you’re going to pursue high-profile cases, leave the romantic getaways and questionable accounting schemes out of it.

Charlton Allen is an attorney and former chief executive officer and chief judicial officer of the North Carolina Industrial Commission.  He is the founder and editor of The American Salient and the host of The Modern Federalist podcast.

Image via Picryl.