Trump Prosecutor Hit With Major Fine for the Second Time

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been ordered to pay $54,000 for intentionally violating Georgia’s Open Records Act in her pursuit of the Trump RICO case, raising new questions about her prosecutorial conduct and transparency.

Quick Takes

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause found Willis’s office “openly hostile” to attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who sought records related to special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
The court ruled Willis’s office intentionally handled Merchant’s records requests differently and not in good faith.
Willis must provide all requested documents within 30 days and pay Merchant’s legal fees totaling $54,000.
This marks the second time Willis has been penalized for open records violations, following a previous $22,000 judgment.
The ruling adds to Willis’s legal troubles after she was previously disqualified from the Trump case due to her romantic relationship with Wade.

Court Rules Willis’s Office Deliberately Obstructed Records Requests

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause’s ruling delivered a significant blow to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, finding her office intentionally violated Georgia’s Open Records Act. The violation centered on records requests made by attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who represents Trump co-defendant Mike Roman in the Georgia election case. According to court documents, the DA’s office records custodian, Dexter Bond, exhibited hostile behavior toward Merchant and deliberately handled her requests differently than those from other parties.

The judge ordered Willis’s office to pay $54,000 in legal fees to Merchant and provide all requested documents within 30 days. Merchant had sought records regarding special prosecutor Nathan Wade’s hiring, confidentiality agreements, and promotional materials related to the Trump case. The court’s ruling specifically noted that Bond refused to communicate with Merchant by phone, contrary to his standard practice with other requestors, further demonstrating what the judge called “a lack of good faith” in handling the records requests.

Nathan Wade Relationship at Center of Controversy

The records dispute stems from broader allegations regarding Willis’s personal relationship with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she hired to lead the Trump prosecution. Merchant previously filed motions to disqualify Willis from the Trump case, revealing that Willis had engaged in a romantic relationship with Wade while he was serving as lead prosecutor and receiving substantial compensation from the county. These revelations eventually forced both Willis and Wade to testify in court about their relationship.

Court records indicate Wade was paid over $600,000 for his work on the case before his resignation. Merchant’s original records requests sought information about Wade’s employment, contracts, and communications—documents that might have revealed potential conflicts of interest or improper financial arrangements between Willis and Wade. The court found that Willis’s office’s substantial obstruction of these requests was “intentional” and “substantially groundless and vexatious,” justifying the significant financial penalty.

Pattern of Records Violations Undermines Prosecution

This is not the first time Willis’s office has been penalized for violating open records laws. Her office was previously ordered to pay $22,000 to Judicial Watch for ignoring an unrelated open records request. The latest ruling comes as Willis continues to face scrutiny over her handling of the high-profile Trump case. While her office declined to comment on the ruling, Merchant expressed satisfaction with the outcome, emphasizing the importance of accountability for public officials.

The Georgia case represents the last remaining criminal case against President Trump, following the dismissal or indefinite delay of other proceedings against him. However, Willis’s prosecution has been significantly compromised by these ongoing ethical controversies. Willis was previously found in default for failing to respond to another public records lawsuit regarding her communications with Special Counsel Jack Smith, further establishing a pattern of resistance to transparency that has undermined her office’s credibility in pursuing the high-profile RICO case.