And this means … what, exactly? No one seems quite sure. 

The Georgia Court of Appeals had scheduled oral arguments in the Fulton County RICO case on an appeal by Donald Trump’s attorneys to disqualify DA Fani Willis. The trial judge had refused to DQ Willis outright, but ruled that either she or her paramour Nathan Wade would have to withdraw, which Wade promptly did. Trump and other co-defendants wanted Willis booted and would love to see the case taken away from Fulton County altogether, with the presumption that no other jurisdiction would pursue an obviously political indictment. 

That may have been a bit of a long shot, but for now, it’s still entirely academic. Despite the date for oral argument being still two weeks away, the court abruptly canceled the hearing. And it doesn’t appear that they scheduled it for a later date, either:

In a brief notice filed late Monday afternoon, the appellate court said the arguments, originally scheduled to take place Dec. 5, are “hereby canceled until further order of this Court.” The notice gave no reason for the cancellation and caught many parties involved in the case by surprise.

The abrupt notice comes amid lingering questions about the future of the Georgia case against Trump as he prepares to return to the White House after his election victory this month.

While other prosecutions of the president-elect appear to be winding down — including those led by special counsel Jack Smith, who also charged Trump with 2020 election interference — Willis has strongly implied in the past that she will continue to pursue her office’s case against Trump unless a court blocks her. A spokesman for Willis declined to comment Monday on the appellate court notice.

In the absence of explanation, let’s have some fun stepping through the possibilities. We'll use the time-honored practice of deduction, with a soupçon of wild-a** speculation. (Results may vary, I warn you up front.) 

One might think that this has to do with the issue of Trump winning the election and the issues of trying a sitting president. And perhaps it does, but this would be a strange proceeding to suspend on that issue. Trump isn’t the only defendant seeking to disqualify Willis, first off, and that issue has nothing to do with Trump’s status as president-elect. The issues regarding Trump’s status as president-elect will have to get raised in McAfee’s trial court first, presumably.

Perhaps the court has a conflict that needs resolution scheduling or otherwise. If that were the case, though, the court would have explained it or rescheduled the hearing. It seems unlikely that the court would just cancel the hearing of their own volition without issuing either a ruling or an explanation. (Kaelan Deese reports at the Washington Examiner that one source says the court acted on its own, so keep that in consideration.)

That leaves a request to cancel by one of the parties to the case. Since Trump and his team are challenging the ruling, a withdrawal of the appeal would explain the cancellation — but one would expect a notice that the appeal had been withdrawn. That seems unlikely for other reasons, however. Trump and his team have been very aggressive in challenging Willis and this case, and he has an argument on this appeal that McAfee had plenty of reasons to DQ Willis. Not only is there a legal argument for disqualification, the effort also has political value for Trump.

So what does that leave us? The possibility still left is that Willis may be withdrawing the case, at least against Trump after his election. If Willis withdrew her opposition to the appeal, the court would have just DQ’d Willis in the absence of a hearing. If, however, Willis informed the court that she’s reconsidering the indictment and that the appeal would be mooted, that would explain a cancellation of the scheduled oral argument without any explanation. It could also explain why neither side will comment to the media until Willis or her office has decided on their next steps, including whether to end the RICO predicate, since its only real target was Trump. 

Of course, all of this is speculation, and perhaps other possibilities will emerge. But it would not surprise me at all if Willis decided that her attempt at lawfare has been mooted by Trump’s election two weeks ago, and now wants to cut bait after her own successful re-election.