Which Trump prosecutions remain active and what are their current statuses?

1. The classified‑documents prosecution (Southern District of Florida): indictment and supplements

Special counsel Jack Smith brought charges in June 2023 accusing Trump of illegally retaining classified documents at Mar‑a‑Lago and obstructing efforts to retrieve them, and prosecutors later added charges alleging efforts to delete surveillance footage and retain other sensitive materials; the investigation and federal case remain active in Florida with ongoing litigation and pleadings tied to evidence and procedure .

2. The federal January 6 prosecution (D.C.): an active docket amid constitutional and procedural fights

One of two prosecutions tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 election sits in federal court in Washington, where prosecutors allege obstruction and conspiracy related to January 6; that federal case has produced high‑profile pretrial rulings — including limits on what the defendant may say about court staff and prosecutors — and remains on the court calendar as a live prosecution subject to motions over immunity, gag orders and evidentiary disputes .

3. The Fulton County, Georgia, racketeering prosecution: state RICO case survives appeals and challenges

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis filed a state racketeering indictment alleging a conspiracy to unlawfully influence the 2020 result; local courts and appellate panels have repeatedly waded into whether Willis may continue and how conflicts should be handled, and the Georgia prosecution remains active with appeals and pretrial litigation shaping its trajectory .

4. What’s no longer active — the completed New York conviction and its aftermath

The Manhattan prosecution resulted in a conviction on falsifying business records in 2024, making it the only case against Trump that reached a guilty verdict and a sentencing (with related appeals and post‑conviction filings afterward); that New York case is therefore not “active” as a pending prosecution in the same way the three other matters are .

5. Competing legal narratives and why “active” is a moving target

Trackers and advocacy groups underscore that “active” can mean very different things: ongoing grand jury exposure, pretrial litigation, superseding indictments or mere appellate skirmishes; the Brennan Center describes three active criminal prosecutions as of its tracking, while outlets such as Lawfare and AP detail the shifting procedural posture on specific motions and jurisdictional fights that can pause or accelerate each matter .

6. Political context and institutional frictions that affect timing and outcomes

These prosecutions are unfolding inside a fraught political and institutional environment — from reported internal Justice Department reviews and personnel shifts to state‑level disputes over special prosecutors — and those dynamics have already produced motions alleging selective or vindictive prosecution as well as judicial rulings restricting certain public commentary by the defendant ^[1].

7. Near‑term signposts to watch

Immediate markers for each case include dispositive motions and appeals over immunity and prosecutorial authority, scheduled pretrial dates and any superseding indictments or plea developments; courts have already ruled on gag limits and jurisdictional questions in the D.C. matter, Fulton County continues to clear procedural hurdles on appeal, and the Florida case continues to generate evidentiary battles — all of which will determine whether these “active” prosecutions proceed to trial, settlement, or dismissal .

Limitations of reporting: public trackers and outlets vary in how they label cases and record their procedural posture, and this synthesis relies on the cited trackers and reporting rather than an exhaustive docket review of every court file .