OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
A noted legal analyst said he believes that Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis has made a “serious error” in filing charges against former President Donald Trump.
As reported by Newsweek, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig made his remarks in response to Willis’ 98-page indictment in August, in which Trump and 18 others with a total of 41 felonies. All the accused were hit with the maximum 20-year sentence for racketeering. After having his mugshot taken at an Atlanta jail in late August, Trump pleaded not guilty.
Honig noted that Trump had already been charged under federal statutes by special counsel Jack Smith for allegedly plotting to steal the 2020 election. Speaking on the legal podcast “Cafe”, Honig said the Georgia charges are “unnecessary and, if anything, lend fuel to Trump’s claims…that this is just a Democratic Party pile on.”
“So why is [the Atlanta indictment] in the greater good, and why is it promoting public confidence in the fairness of this [process] to have one of those seven state prosecutors pile on with a charge of her own? I don’t think it serves any greater good,” he said.
Honig went on to argue that it was a partisan indictment by Willis.
“I disagree with the exercise of prosecutorial discretion by an elected county prosecutor, a partisan, with a D [for Democrat] next to her name. I think it makes Trump’s chances of being convicted and punished higher if that’s the only goal here. If that’s the only goal, all seven states: Michigan, New Mexico, and on down the line, should be charging him too, but that would be ludicrous,” Honig said.
Other legal experts have also ripped Willis’ case against the former president.
Last month, a legal expert warned Willis that she may be walking into a “trap” if she files an appeal to have a case moved out of her jurisdiction and into federal court.
The warning comes after former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows’ first attempt to have Willis’ charges dismissed in federal court failed, prompting him to file an appeal with the 11th Circuit Court, which is now requesting a brief from Willis on whether federal officials, in general, are eligible for such immunity as Meadows, a former Republican congressman from North Carolina, is seeking.
According to Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University, even if Willis wins the review, it will be short-lived and meaningless.
“I think this is a trap that Fani Willis should not walk into,” Kreis wrote on the X platform. “The consensus has generally been (and I think correct) that the current status of the defendant does not matter but what does matter is whether the acts that undergird the legal action are related to official duties.”
“Willis should shut this down despite it maybe giving Meadows a defeat,” continued Kreis. “First, it is a nasty kind of textualism that conservatives like and liberals should reject. Second, it introduces more unnecessary confusion and opens the door to a greater likelihood of Supreme Court review. Third, it makes little theoretical sense. If the idea of removal is to provide a neutral venue to persons employed by the gov’t or empowered by federal law from vindictive actions in state court, then the D’s current status is irrelevant. It’s about protecting federal integrity.”
Concluded Kreis: “Willis should politely decline the invitation to derail litigation and upend the removal statute.”
Honig noted during an earlier segment on CNN in September: “The other big issue – and we just said this word – is removal. Get ready for a lot of talk about removal. Mark Meadows is already trying to do this. Donald Trump will try to follow. In a nutshell, what this means is, if a federal official gets charged with a state crime that relates to that federal official’s official job duties, you can get the case removed.”
Reports have since said that Trump is not planning to seek removal of his case from Willis’ jurisidiction.
