Judge Scott McAffee said the state failed to provide sufficient detail in six counts against Trump and his co-defendants
Georgia judge quashes 6 counts in Trump election case
Former DNI John Ratcliffe joined 'America's Newsroom' to discuss the latest on Trump's election case and his take on the effort to crack down on Chinese-owned TikTok.
A Fulton County judge has quashed six counts in the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and his 18 co-defendants.
Judge Scott McAfee said in an order Wednesday that the state failed to allege sufficient detail for six counts of "solicitation of violation of oath by public officer."
"The Court’s concern is less that the State has failed to allege sufficient conduct of the Defendants — in fact it has alleged an abundance. However, the lack of detail concerning an essential legal element is, in the undersigned opinion, fatal," McAfee wrote.
"As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes but fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited," the judge continued.
"They do not give the Defendants enough information to prepare their defenses intelligently, as the Defendants could have violated the Constitutions and thus the statute in dozens, if not hundreds, of distinct ways."
Georgia state law prohibits any public officer from willfully and intentionally violating the terms of his or her oath as prescribed by law. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis alleged that Trump and six of his co-defendants illegally attempted to persuade numerous state officials to violate their oaths in an effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.
The indictment refers to alleged requests made to members of the Georgia legislature to unlawfully appoint alternative presidential electors and alleged efforts by Trump and his then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to solicit Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to decertify the election.
Multiple defendants challenged the counts on grounds that Willis did not detail the exact terms of the oaths that were alleged to have been violated.
McAfee said the indictment should have alleged an underlying felony solicited by the defendants.
"In other words, a naked charge of solicitation cannot survive unless accompanied by additional elements establishing the solicited felony," the judge wrote.
In addition to overseeing the election racketeering case against Trump, McAfee is also presiding over allegations brought by a handful of co-defendants that Willis hired special counsel Nathan Wade when they were secretly romantic lovers and financially benefited from his hiring.
The bombshell allegations led to a blockbuster evidentiary hearing last month in which Willis and Wade denied the allegations they were in a relationship when he was hired and that Willis never benefited from Wade's position because she would reimburse him with cash for all the vacations they took together.
McAfee is considering the evidence presented in the hearing and is expected to make a decision whether Willis and her team should be disqualified from the case in the next two weeks.
McAfee said at the start of the proceedings this month that it’s "clear that disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one."
Fox News Digital's Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.
Chris Pandolfo is a writer for Fox News Digital. Send tips to
