It’s a technical legal win for Willis since she may continue, along with her full office, prosecuting Trump and 14 others.
But McAfee’s 23-page opinion was a scathing rebuke of the district attorney’s actions, and it remains unclear if Trump will face trial before November on his actions after the 2020 presidential election.
McAfee ruled that either Wade or Willis would have to leave the case, as an “odor of mendacity remains” over the circumstances of their relationship. Wade sent his letter of resignation just hours later, saying he was resigning “in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible.”
Here are takeaways from Friday’s ruling:
Willis survives, but the DA and her case are wounded
While Willis survived the disqualification challenge, the detour over her relationship with Wade has left a stain on her case, both in court – where potential jurors are likely to be familiar with the episode – and the broader public, which will vote on whether to return Trump to the White House in November.
McAfee was highly critical of Willis and Wade’s relationship, describing it as being the result of “bad choices.”
Yet, “Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly,” he wrote.
Their relationship was thrown into the center of the case in January, when co-defendant Mike Roman filed a motion to disqualify Willis over allegations of an “improper” relationship.
Over the course of several hearings, McAfee heard testimony about their relationship and the payments Wade made on trips they took together, which the defendants alleged showed the district attorney benefited financially from their relationship, but Willis responded that she had reimbursed Wade in cash.
Both Willis and Wade took the stand – and Willis’ appearance came in an extraordinary moment when she went to the courtroom and said she was eager to testify, delivering an indignant response to the lawyers bringing the allegations against her.
In his ruling Friday, the judge described Willis’ fiery testimony as “unprofessional.”
“This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing,” the judge wrote.
Trump keeps on racking up pre-trial wins
Friday’s ruling still represents a partial victory for the former president in attempt to delay his four criminal trials and turn the tables on the prosecutors who have indicted him.
Trump’s attorneys have successfully employed numerous efforts to delay all four of the criminal trials that could sideline the former president from the campaign trail this year.
Trump’s election subversion case is in Washington on hold while the Supreme Court hears arguments in April over the former president’s immunity claims. In Florida’s classified documents case, the Trump-appointed judge is expected to set a new trial date in the coming days, after holding a hearing to discuss timing two weeks ago.
And in New York, where Trump’s first criminal trial was poised to begin in less than two weeks, a judge on Friday delayed the trial until at least mid-April after tens of thousands of new pages of evidence had been turned over by the US attorney’s office in Manhattan.
Delay isn’t the only opportunity for Trump’s defense. His team has also found ways to shift the focus from Trump’s dozens of criminal charges to undermining the prosecutors who have charged him and sowing distrust in the legal system itself.
“A perceived conflict in the reasonable eyes of the public threatens confidence in the legal system itself,” McAfee wrote Friday. “When this danger goes uncorrected, it undermines the legitimacy and moral force of our already weakest branch of government.”