The executive director of a nonpartisan group that supports Georgia prosecutors filed a court document Wednesday arguing that the state law President Donald Trump and co-defendants in the dismissed Georgia election interference case are using to seek millions of dollars in attorney fees is likely unconstitutional. Pete Skandalakis, who heads the Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council and took over the case before dismissing it in November, wrote that the law has “serious and potentially unconstitutional deficiencies” because it denies county governments any due process when defendants seek reimbursement. Trump is seeking more than $6.2 million; together, Trump and other defendants have requested nearly $17 million, Skandalakis noted.
ATLANTA — The head of a nonpartisan group that supports Georgia prosecutors filed a court document Wednesday arguing that the state law President Donald Trump and co-defendants in the dismissed Georgia election interference case are using to seek millions of dollars in attorney fees is likely unconstitutional.
Pete Skandalakis, executive director of the Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council, wrote that the law has “serious and potentially unconstitutional deficiencies,” notably because it strips county governments of any due process when defendants seek reimbursement. Trump is seeking more than $6.2 million; together, Trump and other defendants in the case have requested nearly $17 million, Skandalakis noted.
The constitutional challenge targets a law Georgia legislators passed last year providing that if a prosecutor is disqualified for improper conduct and the case is subsequently dismissed, anyone charged may request “all reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred” in their defense. Those fees would come from the prosecutor’s office’s budget.
The due process argument
The law “is probably unconstitutional because it leaves county governments — entities that are politically and practically separate from the elected District Attorney — responsible for paying costs that do not involve them, without any legal recourse to contest that responsibility,” Skandalakis wrote. That arrangement, he argued, violates due process protections under both the U.S. and Georgia constitutions.
Skandalakis also raised a distinct challenge rooted in the law’s text. The statute requires that a prosecutor be disqualified “due to improper conduct,” but he argued that no such finding has been made in this case. The Georgia Court of Appeals removed Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in December 2024 for an “appearance of impropriety” — not for improper conduct itself. Applying the law to this case, Skandalakis wrote, would require a judge to “find an appearance is the same as a completed act.”
He further noted that the law does not define what constitutes a reasonable attorney hourly rate. The rates paid to attorneys who step in when a district attorney or state attorney general has a conflict are $66.57 and $125, respectively — far below what some defense lawyers in the election case charged. Those state rates “should be considered as part of what is reasonable,” Skandalakis wrote.
Defense and prosecution responses
Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, said in a statement that the law is constitutional and that “Mr. Skandalakis’ contentions are simply wrong.”
A spokesperson for Willis declined to comment on the filing. Willis had previously asked the judge overseeing the fee claims to allow her to be heard on the matter.
Background
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis obtained a grand jury indictment against Trump and 18 others in August 2023, using Georgia’s anti-racketeering law to charge them with participating in a scheme to illegally overturn Trump’s narrow 2020 presidential election loss in Georgia.
Defense attorneys sought Willis’ removal after one of them disclosed in January 2024 that Willis had engaged in a romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she had hired to lead the case. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee rebuked Willis in a March 2024 order, saying her actions showed a “tremendous lapse in judgment,” but he did not find a disqualifying conflict of interest. He ruled that Willis could remain on the case if Wade resigned, which Wade did hours later.
Defense attorneys appealed, and the Georgia Court of Appeals removed Willis in December 2024 on the “appearance of impropriety” grounds. The Georgia Supreme Court in September declined to hear Willis’ appeal. Skandalakis, who took over the case, dismissed it in November.