On Thursday, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis denied a congressional investigator’s request for documents relating to her office’s correspondence with special counsel Jack Smith.
The denial is the latest indication that the Peach State prosecutor intends to proceed with her racketeering (RICO) prosecution of President-elect Trump.
In fact, in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan, Willis reiterates her commitment to the long-stalled effort to target the 45th and 47th presidents.
Earlier this month, the Ohio Republican gave the Georgia Democrat a strict deadline of December 9 to turn over documents pertaining to her and her office’s discussions with various federal authorities about criminal investigations into Trump.
That deadline has, of course, passed. Willis, for her part, does not appear concerned about missing the deadline.
“In that letter, you once again request information related to an ongoing prosecution for violations of Georgia law,” the prosecutor’s response states.
“After consulting with legal counsel, I would like to reiterate my position, which has remained unchanged following a year of thoughtful correspondence between our offices.
I am unable to disclose documents that would jeopardize an ongoing investigation and prosecution by my office. As a result, I am unable to produce the documents requested by the House Judiciary Committee.
Willis uses the phrase “thoughtful correspondence” euphemistically in his response to Jordan. The denial letter is the latest volley in a heated exchange between the elected officials that began more than a year ago.
In August 2023, the Judiciary Committee began its oversight campaign by requesting files related to Willis’ office’s “receipt and use of federal grant funds issued by the U.S. Department of Justice.”
Two more letters requesting substantially the same materials arrived in September and December of last year.
Willis responded by declining them all.
In January, the district attorney’s situation deteriorated when the prosecution dropped several co-defendants in the RICO and election subversion case against Trump. Willis’ romantic relationship with then-lead prosecutor Nathan Wade, now fired, facilitated this ongoing disruption.
Willis—and Wade while he was still on the case—repeatedly responded to Jordan’s requests by dismissing any notion of wrongdoing and characterizing the underlying allegations as nothing more than a political witch hunt designed to stymie her prosecution.
Jordan’s efforts were ultimately futile, even as the RICO case drew criticism for a combination of Willis’ personnel decisions and her public defense of those decisions in a speech at a historically Black church that portrayed her—and Wade’s—detractors as racist.
However, the committee persevered in obtaining the documents.
Jordan issued a subpoena in February for documents related to allegations that the district attorney’s office “has misused federal funding.”
Willis wrote in late February, attempting to frame the entire federal funds issue as the result of a lawsuit filed by a disgruntled former employee who was “terminated for cause.”
At the same time, the district attorney’s office began responding to the subpoena with approximately three dozen documents. Furthermore, Willis stated that her office would continue to provide any relevant documents to the committee on a rolling basis.
Jordan sent Willis another letter in March, alleging that the district attorney’s office “failed to produce” responsive documents in response to five broad categories of requests.
Willis responded to Jordan’s comments in late March: “[N]othing that you do will derail the efforts of my staff and me to bring the election interference prosecution to trial so that a jury of Fulton County citizens can determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant.”
For a while, there was radio silence between the two.
Recent events prompted Jordan to reach out again, seemingly confident in his hand’s strength.
A Georgia court found Willis in violation of Peach State open records laws on December 2, during a lawsuit to obtain information about her and her office’s communications with Smith and members of the now-defunct House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack.
In a 6-page order granting the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney ordered the district attorney’s office to provide the requested documents while leaving open the possibility of forcing the state to pay attorneys’ fees.
In the underlying lawsuit, conservative government watchdog group Judicial Watch accused Willis, and Fulton County in general, of making “likely false” representations about the retention of such documents.
Jordan’s final letter to Willis framed the court’s decision in the Judicial Watch case as instructive for how the district attorney might find or conduct herself in response to his similar requests.
Now, that hope seems to have faded.
“As I have previously written to you, the communications you are seeking—to the extent they exist—directly relate to Fulton County’s ongoing investigation of several individuals pursuant to Georgia criminal statutes,” said Willis.
A grand jury investigated and indicted these individuals in accordance with Georgia criminal procedure. The prosecution of these charges is ongoing.
The embattled prosecutor also questions the representative’s authority to make such demands for documents.
“More fundamentally, your request exceeds the limits of congressional authority and violates constitutional principles of separation of powers, state sovereignty, and federalism,” continues the reply from Willis to Jordan.
“Finally, you want documents that show how attorneys in my office conducted an investigation that resulted in a grand jury indictment. Attorney-client privilege, work product privilege, and other common law protections shield such documents from discovery.
