Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis informed a Georgia court that she will comply with subpoenas from state legislators seeking information about her office’s investigation and prosecution of Donald Trump. This marks a shift from her previous resistance to these demands.
A special committee has been investigating Willis’s handling of public funds related to her unsuccessful racketeering (RICO) and election interference case. Since mid-2024, lawmakers have attempted to compel her to testify under oath about the matter. Despite past refusals, she recently submitted a 20-page brief agreeing to produce certain documents for review.
The documents include those previously provided to the United States House Judiciary Committee and materials made public during proceedings related to efforts to disqualify her office from the case. Both parties have agreed that this production satisfies the document requests from the legislative committee, though future subpoenas may still be issued.
A subpoena issued in August 2024 initially seemed unnecessary, as Willis had been scheduled to testify at a September hearing. However, she failed to appear. This prompted lawmakers to seek enforcement of existing subpoenas, leading Willis to file for an injunction to block them.
In December 2024, a court ruled against Willis, affirming the committee’s subpoena power. She later attempted a different legal maneuver, arguing that the 2024 subpoenas should be voided due to a newly elected General Assembly in November. That argument was dismissed as “absurd” by the judge in late February.
The judge also questioned claims from Willis that certain requested materials were protected by attorney-client, work-product, or law enforcement privileges. While Willis maintained these privileges applied to specific documents, she ultimately reached an agreement with lawmakers that no privileged materials were included in the subpoena requests.
Despite this agreement, there remains a potential dispute over the extent of these privileges. Any disagreements on this matter will be addressed separately at a later time.
A key focus of the committee’s inquiry has been Willis’s hiring of former special prosecutor Nathan Wade and her personal relationship with him. The judge had previously scrutinized privilege claims related to this hiring decision.
Throughout the legal back-and-forth, Willis has been represented by former Georgia governor Roy Barnes. While she initially resisted legislative oversight efforts, recent negotiations with the committee have largely resolved the dispute. Now, Willis has requested that the court issue a final ruling to clarify the parties’ appellate rights and bring formal closure to the matter.
