Fani Willis Forced to Cough Up Thousands in Legal Fees

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been ordered to pay $54,000 in penalties after a judge found her office “openly hostile” and in violation of Georgia’s Open Records Act in connection with the Trump case.

Top Takeaways

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause ruled that Willis’s office intentionally violated Georgia’s Open Records Act by stonewalling attorney Ashleigh Merchant’s requests for documents related to special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
The DA’s office must pay $54,000 in legal fees and provide all requested documents within 30 days.
The court found the records custodian was “openly hostile” to Merchant and handled her requests differently than others.
This ruling follows previous revelations about Willis’s romantic relationship with Wade, who received over $600,000 as special prosecutor.
This marks the second time Willis’s office has been penalized for open records violations, after a previous $22,000 judgment.

Court Finds “Openly Hostile” Treatment of Attorney’s Records Requests

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause didn’t mince words when ruling against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in a scathing decision that highlights serious transparency issues in Willis’s handling of the Trump case. The judge ordered Willis’s office to pay $54,000 in legal fees to attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who represents Trump co-defendant Mike Roman. Merchant had sought documents related to special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who later resigned after his romantic relationship with Willis became public. The court found that Willis’s office deliberately obstructed these legitimate records requests.

The ruling specifically cited the conduct of Open Records custodian Dexter Bond, who the court determined treated Merchant’s requests differently from other requestors. According to court documents, Bond refused to communicate with Merchant by phone, contrary to his normal practice with others seeking records. The judge found this differential treatment demonstrated a lack of good faith in handling the requests. Willis’s office now has 30 days to both pay the substantial penalty and produce all of the previously withheld documents.

Pattern of Transparency Issues Emerges

This isn’t the first time Willis’s office has faced penalties for violating open records laws. Previously, her office was ordered to pay $22,000 to Judicial Watch for ignoring a separate records request. The repeated violations suggest a troubling pattern in how the District Attorney’s office responds to legitimate requests for public information. The current case stems from Merchant’s efforts to obtain records regarding Wade’s hiring, confidentiality agreements, and other materials related to the special prosecutor who received over $600,000 for his work on the Trump case.

The court deemed the DA office’s actions as “intentional, lacking good faith, and substantially groundless and vexatious.” This strong language from the court underscores the seriousness with which the judge viewed these violations. Merchant’s records requests were central to her earlier motion to disqualify Willis from the Trump case, alleging that Willis benefited financially from her relationship with Wade.

Implications for the Trump Case

This latest development adds another layer of complication to the already troubled prosecution of President Trump in Georgia. The case now faces additional scrutiny regarding the ethical conduct of the prosecution team. Merchant, who successfully argued for the records and won the substantial judgment against Willis’s office, expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision. The Trump case in Georgia remains the last standing criminal case against the president, with other prosecutions having been dismissed or delayed indefinitely.

The ongoing controversy surrounding Willis’s handling of the case raises serious questions about the prosecution’s integrity. Willis and Wade were both compelled to testify in court regarding their relationship after Merchant filed her disqualification motion. While Willis remains the District Attorney, her credibility has been damaged by these repeated transparency violations and the personal relationship that created apparent conflicts of interest. The court’s ruling serves as a reminder that even prosecutors targeting high-profile defendants must adhere to standards of transparency and ethical conduct.