What crime was juliani indicted
Executive summary
Rudy Giuliani was indicted in multiple matters tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 election: most prominently as one of the defendants in Fulton County, Georgia, where prosecutors used the state’s anti‑racketeering law to allege a broad conspiracy to illegally overturn the 2020 result; that Georgia indictment named Giuliani alongside Donald Trump and others in August 2023 [1] [2]. He has also been connected to indictments in Arizona’s probe of fake electors and to civil and disciplinary consequences for his post‑2020 statements, though federal indictments naming him personally vary across jurisdictions and reporting [3] [4].
1. Georgia racketeering indictment: the centerpiece of the criminal exposure
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis announced a sweeping indictment in August 2023 charging Donald Trump and 18 others under Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) for allegedly conspiring to overturn Georgia’s 2020 presidential result; Rudy Giuliani was one of the named defendants in that racketeering case [1]. Prosecutors alleged the group “unlawfully conspired and endeavored to conduct and participate in [a] criminal enterprise” after the election, and Giuliani was charged as a principal actor in the scheme to cast doubt on the vote and to assist efforts such as false elector slates and direct pressure on state officials [2].
2. How other jurisdictions treated Giuliani: Arizona and federal threads
Reporting shows Giuliani was among allies indicted in Arizona on allegations tied to false electors and paid efforts to subvert the 2020 result; coverage characterizes him as one of multiple defendants in that state’s case [3]. In the federal special‑counsel case led by Jack Smith, Giuliani was identified publicly as an unindicted co‑conspirator in 2023 filings, though Smith’s indictment was ultimately against President Trump alone; The New York Times notes Giuliani and others were not federally indicted in that specific Smith charging document [4].
3. Civil and professional fallout that accompanied criminal exposure
Independent of criminal indictments, Giuliani has faced severe civil liability and disciplinary actions for his post‑2020 conduct. Judges have found him liable for defaming Georgia election workers and imposed sanctions for discovery abuses; those rulings dovetail with the criminal allegations in Georgia by documenting the false claims prosecutors say were part of the push to overturn results [5]. New York appellate disciplinary proceedings and court findings also accused him of communicating demonstrably false and misleading statements as an attorney for Trump [6].
4. Case status, dismissals, pardons and prosecutorial changes — competing narratives
The Georgia case experienced major procedural turmoil: courts disqualified the original prosecutor in part, the case was shifted to the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council, and in late 2025 a special prosecutor decided not to pursue the indictment further, prompting dismissals and claims by defenders that charges should never have been brought [7] [2] [8]. President Trump pardoned Giuliani and others in November 2025 for their roles in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, a move some outlets described as politically charged and legally complicated; coverage shows defenders hailed the pardon while opponents argued it didn’t erase civil liabilities or professional sanctions [9] [2].
5. What sources agree on — and what remains contested or unreported
Multiple outlets consistently report Giuliani’s central role in the Georgia racketeering indictment and his presence in Arizona‑linked charges or investigations [1] [3]. Sources diverge when describing federal criminal exposure: The New York Times reports he was publicly named as an unindicted co‑conspirator in the federal case but not charged there [4]. Available sources do not mention specific counts word‑for‑word from every indictment in this dataset; they describe racketeering/conspiracy allegations in Georgia and fraud‑or‑false‑elector related allegations in Arizona [1] [3].
6. Why this matters: legal, political and reputational stakes
An indictment under a state RICO statute signals prosecutors viewed the alleged conduct as coordinated and sustained, not isolated misstatements — a framing that carries heavier criminal exposure and political consequence [1]. Yet the later prosecutorial decisions, court rulings, pardons and civil judgments demonstrate the criminal fight was both legally complex and intensely politicized: defenders call the prosecutions weaponized, while prosecutors and plaintiffs point to demonstrable falsehoods and coordinated tactics that harmed individuals and institutions [2] [5] [10].
Limitations: this summary is based solely on the provided reporting package; it does not attempt to catalogue every charging document or every individualized count across jurisdictions because those specific texts are not included among the supplied sources (available sources do not mention full text of every indictment).