Georgia Court Dismisses Conspiracy Case Against Trump and Allies

A Fulton County judge has dismissed the conspiracy case against Donald Trump and 14 co-defendants, marking a significant conclusion to nearly five years of legal proceedings. The ruling came on November 26, 2025, following a request from special prosecutor Peter Skandalakis, who took over the case after the removal of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis due to ethical concerns.

Skandalakis, who recently assumed the role of prosecutor, determined that many of the charges would likely fail under free speech protections. He also noted practical considerations, such as the likelihood that Trump would not face criminal prosecution until after his presidency ends in 2029, and that a trial could take a decade to begin.

“It is neither efficient nor effective to pursue this litigation under the current circumstances,” Skandalakis stated in his motion to dismiss. He emphasized that the resources required to continue the case were beyond what the state could realistically provide.

The case originated in February 2021, when Willis launched an investigation focused on two main events: Trump’s call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, in which he urged him to “find” votes to overturn the election results, and the actions of Trump allies who acted as alternative electors for the state.

In his analysis of the charges, Skandalakis pointed out that free speech was central to many of the claims. For example, he mentioned that Rudy Giuliani had made assertions during unsworn testimony that were “wrong and baseless,” but he felt prosecuting such testimony would discourage future witnesses from appearing before the legislature on important matters.

Regarding allegations against David Shafer, accused of making false statements, Skandalakis found no evidence that Shafer had lied. In the context of the breach of election equipment in Coffee County, two individuals had already pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. One of them, attorney Sidney Powell, had advised her co-defendants that accessing election machines was legal, while Scott Hall had traveled to oversee the actions.

Skandalakis concluded that pursuing prosecution against others involved in the incident would be an “inefficient” use of state resources, especially since two co-defendants had already reached favorable resolutions through negotiations with Willis.

Crucially, Skandalakis evaluated the implications of Trump’s call to Raffensperger. He noted that Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, also faced charges for facilitating that call and for observing election verification processes. Skandalakis acknowledged that while the call raised concerns, it was open to interpretation, suggesting that the accused should be afforded the benefit of the doubt when plausible alternatives exist.

He also referenced the broader context of the alleged misconduct, stating that it was largely conceived in Washington, D.C. Special Counsel Jack Smith had previously pursued federal charges against Trump related to attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Skandalakis argued that if Smith, equipped with extensive federal resources, deemed prosecution unfeasible, then pursuing similar charges at the state level would likely yield little success.

The dismissal of this high-profile case has implications not only for those directly involved but also for the ongoing discourse surrounding election integrity and political accountability in the United States.