Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What appeals, ongoing litigation, or post-trial developments remain in each of Trump’s criminal matters as of November 2025?
Executive summary
As of mid-November 2025, most federal criminal prosecutions that were active against Donald Trump have been paused, dropped, or wound down after his return to the White House, while a single state case in Georgia was revived when Peter (Pete) Skandalakis — director of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia — appointed himself to take over the Fulton County racketeering-style election-interference indictment (Skandalakis can dismiss or proceed) [1] [2]. The Manhattan “hush‑money” conviction resulted in an unconditional discharge in January 2025, and the two federal matters led by Special Counsel Jack Smith were wound down or dismissed as Trump became a sitting president [3] [4] [5].
1. Georgia’s election‑interference case: a single surviving criminal matter revived
The Fulton County indictment from 2023 charging Trump and many co‑defendants with conspiring to overturn the 2020 result had been left in limbo after Fulton County DA Fani Willis was disqualified for creating an “appearance of impropriety,” and the Georgia Supreme Court declined to take her appeal; that left the case in need of a new prosecutor, and on Nov. 14, 2025 Peter Skandalakis announced he would appoint himself to take control — a move that revives but does not yet resolve the matter because Skandalakis has discretion to dismiss or pursue the indictment and questions remain about timing and how or whether prosecutions will proceed against a sitting president [2] [1] [6].
2. What Skandalakis’ takeover means in practice — prosecutorial discretion and precedent
Skandalakis’ authority includes the power to dismiss the indictment; reporting notes precedent in which he declined to prosecute other politically sensitive matters (for example, he previously chose not to charge Lt. Gov. Burt Jones), and outlets emphasize the announcement prolongs the case without resolving its ultimate path — trial, plea, dismissal or further appeals remain possible [1] [6] [7]. Politically and legally, observers note the appointment came as other local prosecutors declined the job, signaling both the case’s complexity and the reluctance of others to inherit it [8].
3. Federal cases: Jack Smith’s wind‑down and the practical effect of presidential immunity
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal prosecutions (documents and election-related charges) were wound down after Trump’s election to the presidency; reporting states Smith moved to drop those charges in November 2024 so they could potentially be refiled after Trump leaves office — the dismissal was “without prejudice” in some accounts — and later court actions or DOJ choices determined that the federal election case could not proceed while Trump is president [4] [9] [5]. That winding down left open the legal possibility of future indictments once Trump is out of office, but the current reporting shows no active federal trial for Trump as of these sources [4] [5].
4. Manhattan hush‑money conviction: guilty verdict, then unconditional discharge
The New York trial on falsified business records resulted in a jury conviction on 34 counts in May 2024; however Judge Merchan issued an unconditional discharge in January 2025, and the conviction’s practical penalties were thus minimized in that phase of the litigation [3] [10] [5]. Coverage notes the case remains part of the larger landscape of Trump litigation but that the immediate criminal sanctions were limited by the discharge [3] [5].
5. Appeals, lingering procedural questions and potential future paths
Sources emphasize multiple unresolved procedural strands: Willis’ removal prompted appeals that the Georgia Supreme Court declined to hear, and appellate rulings earlier disqualified Willis and left the case in need of replacement counsel; Skandalakis’ self‑appointment could itself spawn litigation or political pushback as the defense and interested parties test his decisions [2] [1] [6]. For federal matters, the DOJ’s invocation of protocol against prosecuting a sitting president and Smith’s reports create a pathway to refile later, but the sources do not describe any active federal filings against Trump while he holds office [11] [9].
6. Competing narratives and political context
Reporting from Reuters, The Guardian, Politico and others conveys competing frames: prosecutors and some outlets present Skandalakis’ takeover as a restoration of prosecutorial continuity and a careful, nonpartisan step to preserve the indictment; defense advocates frame it as evidence the case is politically motivated and urge dismissal [1] [2] [7]. Observers also highlight that few prosecutors wanted the assignment, suggesting practical risks and political costs to pursuing the case [8].
7. Limits of the current record and what is not found
Available sources do not mention any new trial dates set in Georgia as of these reports, nor do they provide a definitive timeline for whether or when Trump personally would be tried while serving as president; likewise, the sources do not record any final appellate resolution overturning the Manhattan trial record beyond the January 2025 discharge [2] [3]. For federal cases, the sources do not report any active re‑indictments after Smith’s November wind‑down [9] [5].
Conclusion: As of the cited reporting through mid‑November 2025, the only criminal matter clearly moving forward is the Georgia election‑interference indictment revived by Skandalakis’ self‑appointment, while federal prosecutions were wound down and the New York conviction produced an unconditional discharge — each development leaves open legal and political questions and possible future litigation depending on prosecutorial choices and future changes in officeholding [1] [2] [3] [9].