Judge Forces Fani Willis to Cough Up Tens of Thousands in Legal Fees

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis must pay $54,000 in legal fees after a judge ruled her office violated Georgia’s open records laws and was “openly hostile” to an attorney seeking documents in the Trump RICO case.

Quick Takes

Judge Rachel Krause ordered Willis to pay $54,000 for intentionally violating Georgia’s Open Records Act while handling requests from a Trump co-defendant’s attorney.
Willis’ office must produce documents related to Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor with whom she had a romantic relationship, within 30 days.
The records custodian was found to have treated attorney Ashleigh Merchant’s requests differently and with hostility compared to other requestors.
This marks the second time Willis’ office has been penalized for open records violations, following a previous $22,000 judgment.
The controversy stems from Willis’ alleged financial and personal entanglements with Wade, who was paid over $600,000 as special prosecutor.

Judge Rules Against Willis for “Openly Hostile” Conduct

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause delivered a significant blow to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, ordering her office to pay $54,000 in legal fees to attorney Ashleigh Merchant. The judgment came after the court determined Willis’ office had deliberately violated Georgia’s Open Records Act by stonewalling Merchant’s requests for documents related to special prosecutor Nathan Wade. The ruling specifically noted that Willis’ office, through records custodian Dexter Bond, displayed open hostility toward Merchant and handled her requests differently than those from other parties.

The court found that Bond refused to communicate with Merchant by phone, despite this being his standard practice with other requestors. This differential treatment was deemed a “lack of good faith” in the court’s order. Merchant sought records pertaining to lawyers hired by Willis, including confidentiality agreements and promotional materials, all of which Willis’ office failed to provide despite legal obligations under state transparency laws.

Controversial Relationship at Center of Legal Battle

At the heart of the controversy is the romantic relationship between Willis and Wade, which became public knowledge during legal proceedings. Merchant, who represents Trump co-defendant Mike Roman, previously filed a motion to have Willis removed from the Trump case based on this relationship. The affair eventually led to both Willis and Wade being forced to testify in court about their personal involvement, resulting in significant ethical questions about the prosecution’s integrity.

Wade was hired by Willis as a special prosecutor and was reportedly paid over $600,000 for his work on the Trump case. Merchant’s original records requests sought to uncover potential financial benefits Willis might have received from Wade’s appointment, suggesting improper motives behind his selection. The couple’s relationship raised serious questions about potential conflicts of interest and the ethical management of the high-profile prosecution against the president.

Pattern of Records Violations Emerges

This isn’t the first time Willis’ office has been penalized for ignoring open records requests. Previously, her office was ordered to pay $22,000 to Judicial Watch for similar violations. The court deemed the DA’s office’s actions in the current case as “intentional, lacking good faith, and substantially groundless and vexatious.” Willis’ office has been given 30 days to not only pay the $54,000 penalty but also to finally provide the requested documents that should have been turned over originally.

The Georgia case against Trump remains the last standing criminal case against the president after others have been dismissed or delayed. Willis’ office has not commented on the ruling, which represents another setback for the prosecution. The saga highlights ongoing questions about the handling of the case and whether personal relationships and financial arrangements have compromised what was presented as a legitimate prosecution.