An judge in Atlanta threw out three charges in the Georgia election interference case against Donald J. Trump and his allies on Thursday, saying the state did not have jurisdiction to bring them.
In a separate ruling, the judge, Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court, also upheld the felony racketeering charge against Mr. Trump and the 14 other defendants in the case — the centerpiece of the indictment — calling it “facially sound and constitutionally sufficient.”
But the decision to toss three of the remaining 35 charges was a win for the defendants, who have been trying to chip away at the case. They are also seeking the disqualification of its prosecutor, Fani T. Willis, the Fulton County district attorney.
Ms. Willis’s office originally brought 41 counts against 19 defendants in August 2023. Four defendants have since pleaded guilty, and Judge McAfee previously quashed six of the charges.
While Judge McAfee rejected the effort to disqualify Ms. Willis earlier this year, the defense then appealed, freezing much of the case in the interim. Because of the ongoing disqualification effort, the rulings on Thursday applied only to two defendants who aren’t part of that effort: John Eastman, an architect of the plan to deploy fake electors in seven swing states that Mr. Trump lost in 2020, and Shawn Still, one of those fake electors.
But the rulings will almost certainly be extended to other defendants when the disqualification question is resolved. As a result, Mr. Trump, who originally faced 13 charges, is now likely to face eight.
“President Trump and his legal team in Georgia have prevailed once again,” said Steven Sadow, Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer in the Georgia case.
Harvey Silverglate, a lawyer for Mr. Eastman, said that “this is just another step in the gradual dismemberment of an ill-considered indictment.”
Ms. Willis’s office is appealing Judge McAfee’s earlier ruling quashing half a dozen counts; it did not have an immediate comment on Thursday.
Mr. Trump and his co-defendants have been trying a wide range of legal tactics to get the case dismissed, either in part or in its entirety. The motion that led to the latest ruling was related to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which makes federal law “supreme” over contrary state laws. The defendants had cited an 1890 case in which the Supreme Court said a state could not bring a perjury charge spurred by testimony related to a contested congressional election, and their arguments partly persuaded the judge.
Judge McAfee threw out a charge of filing false documents, which is related to false claims that were made in a federal lawsuit brought by Mr. Trump challenging the 2020 election results in Georgia.
The two other tossed counts — criminal attempt to file false documents and conspiracy to file false documents — address the submission of documents to federal officials that claimed a group of pro-Trump fake electors were Georgia’s representatives in the Electoral College.
Five swing states have brought criminal elections cases against Trump allies, though only Georgia has charged Mr. Trump himself. He has also been charged in a parallel federal elections case brought by Jack Smith, a special counsel for the Department of Justice.
Mr. Trump was also convicted of 34 felonies earlier this year, related to hush money payments made to a porn star during the 2016 election.
The Georgia case will not move to trial until next year at the earliest. It was complicated by revelations earlier this year that Ms. Willis engaged in a romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, a lawyer whom she had hired to manage the Trump prosecution team.
Mr. Trump and other defendants have argued that the hiring created a conflict of interest and should lead to Ms. Willis’s disqualification.
Judge McAfee ruled that Ms. Willis could keep the case if Mr. Wade departed, which he did. The Georgia Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the appeal on Dec. 5 in Atlanta.
In his motion upholding the racketeering charge, Judge McAfee rejected a number of arguments that the defendants made. Among them were an argument that the state racketeering law should apply only to defendants seeking to make money from their illegal activities, and an argument that the indictment, and the state laws it was based on, were too vague.
The post Georgia Judge Tosses 3 More Charges in Trump Election Interference Case appeared first on New York Times.
