Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s booking photo at the Fulton County Jail in Atlanta, Georgia on August 24, 2023, was captured and shared by the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office. The image shows Trump posing for his booking photo, providing a visual record of this significant moment.
A Fulton County judge has dismissed six out of the 41 state charges filed against Donald Trump and his allies in Georgia’s extensive election interference case against the former president and others.
On March 13, 2024, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee delivered a ruling that centered around accusations of Trump and other defendants attempting to persuade state officials to violate the law by invalidating the 2020 election results.
According to Georgia election and legal scholar, Anthony Michael Kreis, it is important to note that this ruling does not completely derail the entire case. Instead, it is a specific and technical ruling that highlights the fact that Georgia District Attorney Fani T. Willis has not provided specific details regarding the exact law that the defendants are allegedly violating in certain instances.
The defense’s attempt to disqualify Willis from the Trump case due to her romantic relationship with another prosecutor is unrelated to this matter. A ruling on this issue is expected soon from an Atlanta-area judge.
Amy Lieberman, the politics and society editor, recently interviewed Kreis to gain insight into the reasoning behind this ruling and how it will affect Georgia’s case against Trump and his allies.
Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee attentively listens to arguments presented by lawyers during a hearing in the State of Georgia v. Donald John Trump case at the Fulton County Courthouse in Atlanta, Georgia on February 16, 2024.
What just happened with this ruling?
This is a legal response to a motion filed by several defendants, including Trump. They argue that the state has not provided sufficient details about the charges against them, and therefore, the charges should be dismissed.
The charges primarily focus on the violation of an oath, which stems from Trump’s conversation with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. During the call, Trump urged Raffensperger to “find” 11,780 votes, which would have resulted in a victory for Trump in Georgia. Furthermore, the charges also pertain to the defendants’ testimonies before the state General Assembly, where they requested the Georgia Legislature to overturn the election and select their own electors.
The charges against these defendants were founded on the theory that they illicitly requested state officials to disregard their oath and their duty to uphold the constitutions of the United States and the state of Georgia. However, it remains unclear which specific provisions they were accused of attempting to persuade state officials to violate.
The judge’s ruling emphasizes the importance of the state providing specific details to the grand jury about the alleged violations of the Constitution. This will enable the defendants to mount a proper defense against the charges brought upon them.
Is the judge saying there is not enough evidence to proceed with this case?
The state has failed to adequately clarify the connection between the evidence and an oath, according to Him. One instance is when Rudy Giuliani, along with John Eastman, went to the Georgia General Assembly and presented false information to persuade state officials to overturn the election. The argument is that this action violated both federal and state constitutions.
A prosecutor has several options to present their claim. They can argue that the defendants violated the right to vote as stated in the Georgia Constitution or that they breached the equal protection clause in the U.S. Constitution. It is uncertain which specific provision of federal or state law the defendants infringed upon.
The evidence upholding the charges is undeniably present. However, what remains unclear is the specific theory behind the crime and the precise elements that corroborate these indictments.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger played a crucial role in the case concerning former President Donald Trump’s alleged attempts to influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.
Did this decision surprise you?
This charge is quite unusual and unfamiliar, especially in the context of state legislators and presidential electors. We are exploring uncharted territory in terms of legal theory, which makes it crucial for the state to clearly outline their case and the nature of the alleged criminal activity. The judge’s point is that since we are dealing with a new legal dimension, specificity is essential in establishing the charges and proving the wrongdoing.
In Georgia, it is uncommon to come across a charge of violating an oath. However, the charges in this case have been formulated in a unique manner due to the extraordinary circumstances at hand. We find ourselves in a situation where new laws are being created, akin to the wild west. While this isn’t necessarily negative, it does call for a more meticulous approach. Unfortunately, the prosecutors have not yet demonstrated this attention to detail.
Could this delay the trial against Trump and his allies in Georgia?
There is a possibility that Willis might bring a new and more comprehensive indictment that aligns better with the state oath. If he does, it is likely that there won’t be any further delays.
If she decides to appeal this decision, instead of simply requesting a new indictment, it could potentially cause a slight delay in the process.
Is this a sign that the case is being derailed?
No, only the violation of oaths of office has been removed from the indictment. Although this presents a challenge for the district attorney, it is not a fatal obstacle. Willis can consult with constitutional law experts in her working group to further develop the theory of a constitutional violation. She will also have another opportunity to address this issue.
Anthony Michael Kreis is an Assistant Professor of Law at Georgia State University.
