A Fulton County court has ordered anti-Trump DA Fani Willis to pay Judicial Watch thousands of dollars in attorney's fees and litigation expenses for flouting the state's public records law.
BREAKING: The Superior Court in Fulton County, GA, issued an order granting $21,578 “attorney’s fees and costs” in the open records lawsuit for communications Willis had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee (1/3). https://t.co/qcVL9VTlfT
— Judicial Watch ⚖️ (@JudicialWatch) January 7, 2025
In December, the same Superior Court found that the Fulton County district attorney violated Georgia's Open Records Act (ORA) in a lawsuit brought by the government watchdog group. Under court order, Willis then confessed to wrongly withholding records that Judicial Watch had repeatedly requested.
"The ORA is not hortatory; it is mandatory," Judge Robert McBurney declared in Friday's five-page filing finding Willis financially liable. "Non-compliance has consequences. One of them can be [financial] liability," McBurney chastised, like covering court costs.
Willis now owes Judicial Watch over $21,500 and must hand over that amount within two weeks of the court order.
Fani Willis can use the cash she stuffs in her mattress. https://t.co/k6wegXw0RE
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) January 7, 2025
"Fani Willis flouted the law, and the court is right to slam her and require, at a minimum, the payment of nearly $22,000 to Judicial Watch," Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, said in a press release. "But in the end, Judicial Watch wants the full truth on what she was hiding — her office's political collusion with the Pelosi January 6 committee to 'get Trump.'"
Judicial Watch, which investigates government misconduct, launched the civil suit in March after Willis lied about not possessing any records responsive to a request seeking all communications she may have had with Special Counsel Jack Smith's office and/or the House select January 6 committee.
Judicial Watch knew that the records request should have yielded at least one relevant document in her office's possession: a letter she sent to the January 6 committee's chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS).
In the letter, Willis officially requested the congressional committee's help with her Trump investigation and offered to trek to Capitol Hill to convene at their convenience. "It may well be most efficient for your staff and effective for our understanding of my staff and me to meet with your investigators in person. We are able to travel to Washington..." Willis wrote.
The letter to Thompson is clearly a responsive record, Judicial Watch noted, yet it was neither produced in response to the request nor claimed as an exemption. Judicial Watch also cited news reports indicating that representatives of Willis did indeed travel to the nation's capital to meet with J6 committee staffers in April, May, and November 2022, as Willis previously proposed.
Last week, Judge McBurney further reprimanded Willis, ruling that "per her Records Custodian's own admission, the District Attorney's Office flatly ignored Plaintiff's original ORA request, conducting no search and simply (and falsely) informing the County's Open Records Custodian that no responsive records existed."
"We know now that that is simply incorrect: once pressed by a Court order, Defendant managed to identify responsive records, but has categorized them as exempt," McBurney wrote. "Even if the records prove to be just that — exempt from disclosure for sound public policy reasons — this late revelation is a patent violation of the ORA. And for none of this is there any justification, substantial or otherwise: no one searched until prodded by civil litigation."
December's directive instructed Willis to conduct "a diligent search" of her records and turn over all responsive material not legally exempt from disclosure.
Following the judge's ruling, Willis finally admitted that there are, in fact, records of communications with the J6 committee. However, she refused to release those files. Claiming a series of legal exemptions, Willis argued that "they arose from the investigation, subsequent indictment, and prosecution" of President-elect Donald Trump, are "subject to attorney-client privilege" and considered "confidential work product," and accordingly are part of "a pending, ongoing criminal investigation and prosecution."
The case she cites is "essentially dead in the water," Fitton said. Willis simply "wants to hide these records from the American public," he continued, but "Judicial Watch plans to push back in court against this disingenuous secrecy."
Prior to this, Willis denied multiple times that proof of contact exists. The only document she did end up relinquishing was the already publicly available Thompson memo.
Still, she categorically denied the existence of any documentation of correspondence with Smith's office: "Regarding '[a]ll documents and communication sent to, received from, or relating to Special Counsel Jack Smith or any employees in his office,' a diligent search indicates that no such documents or communications exist."
Judicial Watch has since filed a motion asking the court to conduct a private inspection of the records in order to determine whether the records really are exempt—and if they can be redacted—as well as appoint a special master who would supervise her records search.
Judicial Watch said the Democrat DA's latest response "makes no showing that the search was diligent. Based on her previous searches in this matter, it probably was not diligent. Likewise, she provided no list or even a general description regarding any responsive records she has elected to withhold. Without a list or description, it is impossible to evaluate what, if any, exemptions or exceptions are applicable, as she now contends."
"She did not even bother to conduct a search until the Complaint was filed," Judicial Watch quipped.
"Fani Willis can't be trusted, which is why Judicial Watch is asking the court to review her secret anti-Trump collusion records and for a special master to handle the search for more records," Fitton added. "The court should put an end to Willis' shell games to hide her conspiracy with Pelosi's January 6 committee and who knows who else..."
Willis has until January 16 to respond to Judicial Watch's special master request.
According to Georgia law, as the custodian of these records, Willis bears the burden of proving that the exemptions apply.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member