Judge Allows Trump, Co-Defendants To Pursue Millions In Fani Willis Legal Fees

Fani Willis, the controversial District Attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, faced a significant setback this week when a judge denied her request to intervene in ongoing litigation regarding the reimbursement of legal fees stemming from her now-dismissed election case against Donald Trump and several co-defendants.

The ruling by Judge Scott McAfee allows efforts to recover nearly $17 million in attorney fees and costs to proceed following the collapse of the high-profile prosecution last year, Zero Hedge reported.

In August 2023, Trump and 18 others were indicted in Fulton County for allegedly conspiring to overturn then-President Joe Biden’s narrow election victory in Georgia. However, the case was dismissed in November, prompting Trump and several co-defendants to seek reimbursement for the legal expenses incurred during the prosecution.

Willis’ office attempted to intervene in the fee litigation to block these claims. However, Judge McAfee ruled that the District Attorney’s office had no legal standing to participate, as Willis had already been disqualified from the case. He noted that the state was represented by a temporary District Attorney appointed after Willis’ removal, indicating that the office’s interests were already adequately represented in the proceedings.

Nonetheless, McAfee did grant Fulton County itself permission to intervene in the case, as the county funds most of the District Attorney’s office and could ultimately be responsible for any reimbursement ordered by the court.

The dispute revolves around a 2025 Georgia law that allows defendants to recover attorney fees if a prosecutor is disqualified and the case is later dismissed. The decision to allow the reimbursement claims to move forward could have significant financial implications, potentially exposing taxpayers to substantial costs if these requests are approved.

Trump himself is seeking more than $6.2 million in attorney fees from the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office under this statute.

Willis argued that the state law allowing reimbursement of legal fees was unconstitutional and maintained that her disqualification was not the reason the case was ultimately dismissed. However, Judge Scott McAfee declined to pause the reimbursement process at this stage.

Willis was removed from the case in December 2024 after attorneys for Donald Trump and several co-defendants argued that her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade created a conflict of interest. They also cited public statements Willis had made about the prosecution.

In September 2025, the Supreme Court of Georgia declined to review Willis’s removal from the case. Following that decision, the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia was tasked with identifying a replacement prosecutor. The case was later dismissed.

Trump attorney Steve Sadow praised McAfee’s decision in a statement posted on X, saying the judge had “properly denied DA Willis’ motion to intervene” in Trump’s effort to obtain reimbursement of attorney fees.

Trump also criticized Willis after the Georgia Supreme Court declined to hear her appeal regarding her removal from the case.

“What Fani Willis did to innocent people, patriots that love our country, what she did to them by indicting them and destroying them, she should be put in jail,” he said.

The next portion of the litigation will focus on assessing whether the requested reimbursements are reasonable according to the law. A judge will review the fee claims, including Trump’s request for over $6.2 million. That evaluation process may take several weeks or even months and could potentially result in appeals.

In 2023, Willis indicted Trump under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, alleging that he engaged in illegal activity in his efforts to contest the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The case was eventually dismissed, and in December 2024, the Georgia Court of Appeals stated that a lower court had erred in allowing Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who was also her romantic partner, to choose to step away from the case.

The court ruled that the “significant appearance of impropriety” meant Willis and her office should be “wholly disqualified.” Willis appealed that decision, but she lost in court.

Trump Admin Asks SCOTUS to Allow Deportation of 350,000 Haitians

The U.S. Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court of the United States on Wednesday to allow the administration to move forward with ending temporary deportation protections for more than 350,000 Haitian immigrants.

The request for emergency relief is the latest development in legal disputes stemming from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to terminate Temporary Protected Status for several countries. Ending the designation would make affected immigrants eligible for deportation.

The Supreme Court has previously allowed the administration to roll back similar protections for Venezuelan migrants, while a separate request involving Syrian immigrants remains pending before the court.

Haiti was first granted Temporary Protected Status in 2010 after a devastating earthquake killed more than 300,000 people and caused widespread destruction across the country.

During his first administration, President Donald Trump moved to rescind Haiti’s TPS designation. However, the decision became tied up in litigation and was not implemented before he left office.

After returning to the presidency for a second term, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced steps to end Haiti’s TPS designation, with the change scheduled to take effect Feb. 3.

In announcing the decision, Noem said ending the protections reflected “a necessary and strategic vote of confidence in the new chapter Haiti is turning” and aligned with the administration’s broader foreign policy approach toward a “secure, sovereign and self-reliant Haiti.” She acknowledged that some conditions in the country remained concerning but said certain areas were suitable for return.

In December, five Haitian nationals filed a lawsuit challenging the termination of TPS and sought to block the move. A federal district court granted their request last month, concluding in part that the decision to end the designation was likely motivated by racial animus, without providing any evidence to justify that determination.

“Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants,” U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee and first LGBTQ federal judge, wrote.

“Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the [Administrative Procedure Act] to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that,” she added.