The Fulton County, Georgia, election interference case against President Donald Trump and others has been dismissed after the prosecutor who took over the case requested that it be dropped.
“In my professional judgment, the citizens of Georgia are not served by pursuing this case in full for another five to ten years,” wrote Pete Skandalakis, the executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, who took over the case after the original prosecutor was disqualified from the case.
Within minutes of Skandalakis’ court filing, the judge overseeing the case granted the request and dismissed the case.
“This case is hereby dismissed in its entirety,” Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee wrote.
Trump and 18 others pleaded not guilty in August 2023 to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia.
The charges, which were brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis following Trump’s Jan. 2, 2021, phone call in which he asked Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” the votes needed to win the state, allege that the defendants solicited state leaders throughout the country, harassed and misled a Georgia election worker, and pushed phony claims that the election was stolen, all in an effort for Trump to remain in power despite his election loss.
Defendants Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Kenneth Chesebro and Scott Hall took plea deals in exchange for agreeing to testify against other defendants.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One during travel to Palm Beach, Florida, from Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, November 25, 2025.
Anna Rose Layden/Reuters
Willis was subsequently disqualified from the case following accusations of impropriety regarding her relationship with a fellow prosecutor, leaving a council of Georgia attorneys to assign an independent prosecutor to take over the case and determine its fate.
Skandalakis took over the case himself earlier this month after he said he was “unable” to find someone else to accept the job.
In a statement following the dismissal of the case, Trump attorney Steve Sadow said, “The political persecution of President Trump by disqualified DA Fani Willis is finally over. This case should never have been brought. A fair and impartial prosecutor has put an end to this lawfare.”
The dismissal marks the end of the two major election interference cases Trump faced following the 2020 election.
Following an eight-month investigation by then-special counsel Jack Smith, Trump pleaded not guilty in August 2023 to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged.
After Trump was reelected president last year, the case was dismissed without prejudice due to the Justice Department’s long-standing policy barring the prosecution of a sitting president.
In a 22-page filing explaining his decision to drop the Fulton County case, Skandalakis wrote that the allegations and case theory are “not a viable basis for prosecution,” and noted the timing and logistical difficulties of continuing the case specifically against Trump.
He acknowledged the seriousness of the case, writing that the indictment, if proven, would establish a conspiracy undertaken by multiple individuals … to overturn the results of the November 2020 Presidential Election,” but said that trying a criminal case against Trump would not be feasible.
“There is no realistic prospect that a sitting President will be compelled to appear in Georgia to stand trial on the allegations in this indictment,” he wrote. “And even if, by some extraordinary circumstance, [Trump] were to appear in Georgia on January 21, 2029 — the day after his term concludes — an immediate jury trial would be impossible.”
Regarding the specifics of the case against Trump, Skandalakis wrote that “Overt acts such as arranging a phone call, issuing a public statement, tweeting to the public to watch the Georgia Senate subcommittee hearings, texting someone to attend those hearings, or answering a 63-minute phone call without providing the context of that conversation, just to name a few examples, are not acts I would consider sufficient to sustain a RICO case” against the president, referring to the racketeering charges that Trump faced.
Skandalakis wrote that he considered severing Trump from his co-defendants but concluded that such a move would be “futile and unproductive.”
He also concluded that the case should have been pursued federally, not in a Fulton County courtroom.
“The criminal conduct alleged in the Atlanta Judicial Circuit’s prosecution was conceived in Washington, D.C., not the State of Georgia. The federal government is the appropriate venue for this prosecution, not the State of Georgia,” he wrote.
He also identified a series of flaws in the prosecution’s case theory, including that the Republican electors charged lacked criminal intent and that the allegations against federal officials Jeff Clark and Mark Meadows “fall short of the far more rigorous standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt required to sustain a criminal conviction.”
In concluding his explanation, Skandalakis acknowledged that his decision would receive pushback — but said he still had to make it.
“The role of a prosecutor is not to satisfy public opinion or achieve universal approval; such a goal is both unattainable and irrelevant to the proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion. My assessment of this case has been guided solely by the evidence, the law, and the principles of justice,” he wrote.
