The Supreme Court of Georgia could soon clarify how much access legislative committees have to prosecutors’ internal records and communications.

What You Need to Know

• Supreme Court of Georgia to hear dispute over prosecutorial immunity and legislative oversight.
• Fulton District Attorney Fani T. Willis challenges denied motion to quash investigative Senate subpoenas surrounding 2020 election-interference prosecution.
• Appellant counsel with The Barnes Law Group in Marietta will argue opposite appellee counsel with Robbins Alloy Belinfante Littlefield.

Mark your calendars. An imbalance between prosecutorial immunity and legislative oversight is set to take center stage at the Supreme Court of Georgia Tuesday.

The legal fight is expected to pit Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis against Georgia Senate Special Committee on Investigations chair Sen. Bill Cowsert, R-Athens.

The parties are at odds about whether communications and documents related to a prosecutor’s work are protected by privileges, including attorney-client, when the “client” is the state.

In addition to drawing opposing appellate heavy hitters from The Barnes Law Group and the Robbins Firm to the legal ring, the Dec. 9 oral argument could result in precedent about legislative committees’ authority to subpoena prosecutors in political cases.

Privilege Violated?

The oral argument is expected to draw a team of appellate standouts for either side.

In one corner, former Georgia Gov. Roy E. Barnes and John Ross Bartholomew IV of The Barnes Law Group are slated to deliver their best legal blows on Willis’ behalf.

Appellant counsel are expected to challenge Fulton County Superior Court Judge Shukura L. Ingram’s denial of Willis’ motion to quash a subpoena issued by the investigative committee into the district attorney’s handling of President Donald Trump’s 2020 election-interference case. In addition to being improper, appellant counsel contend the committee’s subpoena infringed on protections surrounding prosecutorial work.

Appellant counsel posit that legislative investigators lacked the authority to compel Willis, as a sitting district attorney, to testify about ongoing or past prosecutorial decisions.

The pair is expected to argue that immunities—such as attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine—protect prosecutors like Willis from being compelled to surrender or testify about internal communications. By attempting to force disclosure through the subpoena, lawmakers violated long-standing confidentiality protections governing the relationship between prosecutors and the state, per appellant counsel.

But Robbins Firm regulatory litigators Joshua Barrett Belinfante, Jane Ashley Ravry and Vincent Robert Russo Jr. are expected to disagree Tuesday. On behalf Cowsert and fellow Senate investigation committee members, appellee counsel will likely come prepared to argue that certain records and communications must be produced for oversight purposes.

Case Dismissed

Oral arguments are scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. EST on Dec. 9 following a Supreme Court of Georgia admission ceremony. The session will be livestreamed.

The appellate showdown is set to take place just shy of two weeks after Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee dismissed Willis’ election interference case against Trump on Nov. 26. The Georgia matter had been the last remaining criminal case against Trump related to the 2020 election.

The case dismissal occurred days after scheduling conflicts resulted in Willis failing to testify before the investigative Senate committee on Nov. 13 about her indictment of Trump.

While justices will hear Willis’ subpoena challenge Tuesday, the high court declined to hear the district attorney’s appeal of her removal from the election interference case against Trump in September.

In January, Willis attempted to challenge whether the Georgia Court of Appeals erroneously disqualified her “based solely upon an appearance of impropriety and absent a finding of an actual conflict of interest or forensic misconduct.”

However, the high court declined to hear Willis’ appeal, noting an “appearance of impropriety” between Willis and hired special prosecutor Nathan Wade.