Former President Donald Trump is, for a second time, requesting that a Georgia court shut down an investigation into allegations he interfered in the state’s elections in 2020.
On Thursday, Mr. Trump’s legal team asked the Superior Court for Fulton County, Georgia, to quash a report prepared by a special purpose grand jury (SPGJ) involved in the months-long investigation. Mr. Trump’s lawyers also called on the court to block any evidence obtained through that special purpose grand jury from being reintroduced in court and asked to disqualify Democratic Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from any further proceedings involving the former president.
The Fulton County SPGJ had been empaneled for eight months as Ms. Willis investigated allegations that laws were broken as Mr. Trump and his allies disputed Georgia’s 2020 election results.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney has not yet ruled on the Trump team’s initial petition to quash the case. The new petition now requests to throw out the SPGJ report and disqualify Ms. Willis in order to preempt a criminal indictment, arguing that the SPGJ proceedings went beyond their lawful purpose.
Mr. Trump’s legal team noted Mr. McBurney had impaneled new grand juries while Mr. Trump’s original motion to quash had yet to be decided. The court filing argues that “between the District Attorney’s driving the process and the Supervising Judge’s inaction, [Mr. Trump] is at the mercy of State actors who have heretofore paid no regard to his rights, even his right to have his motion heard and ruled upon.”
The new petition again cites Ms. Willis’s alleged conflicts of interest in the case, as well as media appearances by members of the special purpose grand jury.
NTD reached out for comment from the Fulton County DA’s office but did not receive a response by the time this article was published.
“Mr. Trump asserts that he has been ‘inextricably intertwined with this investigation since its inception’ in early 2021, also observing that he participated in the event which precipitated the investigation, a phone call in January of 2021. However, as he acknowledges, he was never a witness before the SPGJ,” Ms. Willis’ office argued. “Because the Movants’ arguments do not demonstrate individualized injuries or injuries-in-fact rather than injuries-in-conjecture, they lack standing to challenge the constitutionality of the pertinent statutes.”
Later on in the May response filing, Ms. Willis’s office argued, “If an investigation results in actual criminal charges against [Mr. Trump], the justice system ensures they will have no shortage of available remedies to pursue.”
