Former Federal & GA Prosecutors File Brief Opposing Trump Motion To Quash GA Special Purpose Grand Jury Report, Suppress Evidence, & Recuse DA & Judge

A bipartisan group of eight former federal and Georgia state prosecutors filed an amicus brief in the Superior Court of Fulton County Georgia on May 19 opposing former President Donald Trump’s motion to quash the Special Purpose Grand Jury (SPGJ) report, preclude the use of any evidence derived from it, and recuse Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s office and the presiding Judge.

The former prosecutors collectively have decades of experience with the structure and process of law enforcement investigations, grand jury proceedings, charging decisions, and the ethical rules and restrictions that apply to prosecutors and judges. (See full list of amici here.)

The special purpose grand jury was impaneled in May 2022 to investigate the attempt to overturn the 2020 Georgia presidential election result, including the fake presidential electors effort.

“Trump cannot establish any cognizable injury, he cannot seek the relief he does at this point in the investigation, and his substantive arguments are meritless,” according to the brief. “Moreover, his proposed relief – seeking to quash the SPGJ report and suppress any findings from the SPGJ proceedings by calling into question the constitutionality of all SPGJs under Georgia law, and seeking to prohibit the FCDA from further involvement in the this case – is, in Amici’s collective decades of prosecutorial experience, extreme and in contravention of established norms governing the criminal justice system. This Court should not countenance these efforts.”

The brief explains: “Prior to the SPGJ’s recommendations becoming public, and prior to any indictments being issued — which must be done through a separate, regular grand jury — former President Donald J. Trump seeks what in Amici’s experience is extraordinary and unwarranted relief from this Court. Ignoring that SPGJs have been utilized in Georgia for decades, Trump challenges the entire SPGJ system as unconstitutional. He also seeks to suppress the SPGJ’s findings, disqualify the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office (‘FCDA’) from any further involvement in this matter and reassign the motion to a different judge — all before knowing if he is even indicted. Cathleen A. Latham, a former Coffee County Republican Party chair and one of the 16 individuals who cast Electoral College ballots falsely claiming Trump won the 2020 presidential election, joins in Trump’s motion.”

According to the brief:

“This Court should not grant the sweeping and unprecedented relief that Trump’s motion seeks. Being subject to criminal investigation and potential indictment is not a cognizable injury that can support standing. Indeed, Trump and Latham do not know whether the SPGJ has recommended charges be brought against them, whether the FCDA will seek to obtain indictments against them in front of a separate, regular grand jury, or whether that separate grand jury will vote to indict them—contingencies that must all be met before they can claim to have any injury at all. Seeking relief now is premature. Moreover, longstanding prudential reasons make courts loathe to interfere in ongoing investigations, as they recognize that such interference will amount to an egregious violation of the separation of powers between the judicial and executive branches of government.”

The brief continues: “Even if this Court were to consider Trump’s arguments on the merits, they are entirely baseless. Trump’s due process rights cannot be violated by statutes that merely establish SPGJ procedures, and in any case, such statutes are not vague. Indeed, courts have already rejected several of the arguments he raises, finding them to be ‘manifestly without merit.’ He also cannot show that there is any conflict sufficient to disqualify the FCDA from continuing this investigation, including an absolute lack of any improper ‘private interest’ that the FCDA has for investigating him. Nor are the comments made by the FCDA, grand jurors, or the presiding judge improper — and in any event, no prejudice resulted from such comments.

“Through their decades of experience investigating and prosecuting criminal cases, Amici recognize the vital importance of thorough, unbiased, and independent investigations. Trump’s request for this Court to intervene in an ongoing criminal investigation, dictate the evidence which prosecutors may consider when making investigative and charging decisions, and disqualify an entire prosecutor’s office before an indictment even issues is a dramatic departure from established criminal procedures. Indeed, Trump cites no precedent for such a significant encroachment into the quintessentially executive-branch realm of law enforcement. What is more, Trump seeks this relief based on a series of arguments that are entirely meritless. The motion should be denied in full.”

The brief outlines a series of arguments made by Trump that are entirely meritless, including:

“Under established law, Trump has no cognizable injury, and separation-of-powers and other prudential principles recognized by courts in Georgia and across the country prohibit such intervention in criminal investigations.”