So, let's talk about the Georgia Court of Appeals. Now that Judge McAfee has granted the certificate of immediate review for the disqualification of Fani Willis, what's the process? The application for an interlocutory appeal will be randomly assigned to a judge. From there...
it will be assigned to a staff attorney who will review the application and any supporting materials. That attorney will provide a memo providing a recommendation to the judge on whether the appeal should be granted or denied. The court has 45 days to act, so decisions are quick.
Court of Appeals Rule 30(a) provides factors that favor review. The most important one here will be whether there is a need to establish clear precedent to refine and guide the trial court. Defendants will have to argue that precedent is insufficient *and* this is a good vehicle.
The other key is this: is there *reversible error*? Even if there might be a need for some clarification around the law, the COA may not necessarily see the need to step in and reverse Judge McAfee if they think he essentially got it right. That may be the biggest hurdle for Ds.
Appeals are heard by a three-judge panel. Only one judge on a panel needs to agree to hear the appeal. All three are thus required to agree to deny it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Supreme Court arguments in Trump v. United States and presidential immunity will begin momentarily. I’ll thread argument highlights and commentary here:
John Saurer for Trump: The Framers wanted an "energetic executive" and the "looming threat" of prosecution for "fearless action" would undermine the executive branch.
Good morning— let’s talk about the GA Constitution! Yesterday, Judge McAfee granted quashal on a number of charges related to Donald Trump and his allies’ alleged attempts re: inducing state officials to violate their oaths of office. So what does the Ga. Const. require? #gapol
The special demurrers centered on the fact the Fulton County DA did not articulate how the election interference defendants, if successful, would’ve suborned a constitutional violation. The Ga. Const. is unique. And it is very important here for Willis if she wants to indict.
Most importantly, Georgians have an express right to vote. The right to vote— at its core— means the right to cast a ballot and have it count. Trump asked SoS Raffensperger to dilute votes in the famous phone call, a fraud that would unlawfully void voters’ preferred outcome.
Why was Judge McAfee's decision correct in the Fulton County case? The DA alleged that some defendants solicited state officials to violate their oath of office to uphold the federal and state constitutions, including the Secretary of State and members of the General Assembly.
The U.S. Constitution and GA Constitution are different documents and election subversion could violate a number of different provisions of either constitution. What provision of each does the DA believe these co-defendants conspired to undermine and induce officials to violate?
The DA never plainly detailed the constitutional theory of why what the defendants were doing was a violation of constitutional principles. There are various ways to articulate that but the defendants were not given notice by the DA sufficient to create a defense.
NEW from me in the @ajc: Judge McAfee 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 have the power to disqualify @FaniforDA or the @FultonCountyDA from the 2020 election interference prosecutions under the Georgia Constitution without evidence of an actual conflict of interest. #gapol ajc.com/opinion/case-a…
A few brief highlights of my argument. The standard for prosecutorial disqualification is an 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘵 not the 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 of a conflict or an appearance of impropriety. Judge McAfee on February 15th suggested that the standard could be either.
Judge McBurney indicated this could be the standard when he disqualified the Fulton County DA's Office from investigating Burt Jones' role in the 2020 election aftermath while the Special Purpose Grand Jury was empaneled. Here is Judge McBurney's footnote. fultonclerk.org/DocumentCenter…
Judge McAfee has entered to courtroom and we're on our way to hearing arguments on motions to quash subpoenas in advance of Thursday's motion to disqualify Fani Willis in the 2020 election case.
McAfee: The motions for quashal are procedurally ripe for review.
The evidentiary hearing is still necessary to establish a record on the allegations of a conflict of interest.
Anna Cross for the state: the witnesses from the DA’s office subpoenaed don’t have evidence to provide and even if the allegations were entirely true (which the state does not concede) the law would not require disqualification
Trump moves to dismiss the Fulton case because, he claims, trying him for election crimes in Georgia after the 2020 election violates Double Jeopardy: he was already impeached and tried in the Senate for inciting an insurrection.
This is so meritless it borders on the comical.
Let's turn to the Constitution:
First, impeachment is a political question. What constitutes an impeachable offense is essentially a political matter. So, too, is the judgment. And the Constitution's text reinforces the idea that a conviction is not a criminal conviction. So, too, it follow an acquittal.