Prior to Donald Trump, no US president — current or former — had ever been indicted. That all changed on April 4 when Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced that a New York grand jury had indicted Trump on 34 criminal counts. Since then, he has been the subject of three additional criminal indictments. He now faces a total of 91 criminal charges spanning both state and federal prosecutions.

All of the criminal cases can be hard to keep straight. In an effort to help orient JURIST readers from the US and beyond, we have compiled a detailed explainer of all four criminal cases. The descriptions contain a basic summary of the case, the criminal charges contained therein, and a tentative timeline for the cases — all based on the information available at the time of this report.

At the outset, it is important to note that Trump also faces two civil cases in New York state court. Since this explainer only pertains to the criminal cases against Trump, those two civil cases will not be explained in detail. However, for readers who would like to learn more about the latter, the first case involves New York Attorney General Letitia James’s civil fraud case against the Trump organization, and the second case is the sequel to another civil case in which writer E. Jean Carroll accuses Trump of sexual harassment.

With that said, let’s begin.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s Falsified Documents Case

Announced on April 4, a New York state grand jury indicted Trump on 34 counts of “falsifying business records in the first degree.” What that means is that, the grand jury believes Trump likely entered false information into his official business records for the purpose of committing, aiding or concealing the commission of another crime 34 times. It is not clear from the information available at this time what the underlying “commission of another crime” behind these 34 counts is.

The indictment alleges that from August 2015 to December 2017, Trump and his allies perpetrated a scheme to hide damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election. Bragg later elaborated on the indictment, claiming that Trump, through her personal lawyer Michael Cohen, paid $130,000 to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to dissuade Daniels from publicizing a sexual encounter between her and Trump. This is what became known as a “hush-money” payment. Apparently Cohen set up a shell corporation to pay Daniels, and Trump later reimbursed Cohen through monthly installments disguised as retainer fees in Trump’s business records. Though Trump has admitted no wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to the 34 criminal counts, Cohen pleaded guilty to his role in the scheme in 2018.

Since Trump pleaded not guilty, the case is set to proceed to trial before a state jury in Manhattan, New York. The trial is set to begin at some point in March 2024, though Bragg has signaled he would be willing to delay the trial if it stood in the way of the federal government’s cases against Trump. Based on the proposed timelines in Smith’s two federal criminal cases against Trump, and the fact that those cases are also slated to proceed to trial, it is likely Bragg’s case will proceed to trial later than the estimated March 2024 date.

US Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Classified Documents Case

The next indictment against Trump came on June 9, when Smith announced that a federal grand jury indicted Trump on 37 criminal counts. This indictment was later amended by a superseding indictment, which added an additional three charges against Trump—bringing the grand total of criminal charges in the case to 40. Included among the charges are:

• 32 counts of willful retention of national defense information
• 1 count of conspiracy to obstruct justice
• 1 count of withholding a document or record
• 1 counts of corruptly concealing a document or record
• 1 counts of concealing a document in a federal investigation
• 1 count of scheming to conceal
• 1 count of making false statements and representations
• 1 count of altering, destroying, mutilating or concealing an object
• 1 count of corruptly altering, destroying, mutilating or concealing a document, record, or other object

Two other individuals are also indicted alongside Trump in this case. Trump aide Waltine Nauta faces eight criminal counts and Trump property manager Carlos De Oliveira faces four criminal counts for their respective roles in the alleged criminal scheme.

All of these charges come together to form Smith’s prosecution against Trump, in which he claims that the former president wrongfully took classified government documents with him when he departed the White House on January 20, 2021. These documents include classified descriptions and analyses of US and foreign allies’ defense and weapons capabilities, nuclear information , potential US vulnerabilities and retaliation plans. The indictment clearly states that Trump was not authorized to possess or retain these classified documents after his tenure as US president came to an end on January 20, 2021.

And yet, the indictment details how Trump took these documents and stored them at his personal residence in Mar-a-Lago, Florida in areas such as the ballroom, his personal bedroom, an office and—at one point—in a shower. The indictment describes how Nauta and De Oliveira assisted Trump in moving boxes of classified documents around the property, in an effort to evade federal investigators’ efforts to recover the documents. The documents were also removed from Mar-a-Lago and placed on Trump’s private plane whereupon he took them to his Bedminster, New Jersey residence as well.

Not only does Smith allege that Trump wrongfully retained the documents, but the indictment also describes at least two occasions in which Trump displayed the classified documents to individuals without proper security clearances. During those occasions, Smith alleges Trump acknowledged that the documents were “still a secret” and that he no longer had the power to declassify them.

Smith also alleges that Trump, Nauta and De Oliveira repeatedly lied to federal investigators and sought to delete video footage from a security camera that captured them moving the boxes of classified documents. Some of the false statements charges originate from interviews with federal investigators as recently as from January of this year.

In the face of the indictment, Trump, Nauta and De Oliveira have all entered not guilty pleas. Since they are co-defendants, it is likely that all three will proceed to trial together, however, the judge overseeing the case does have the ability to sever their trials. If she were to choose to do that, then all three could proceed to trial separately.

As of now, all three are set to proceed to trial before a Fort Pierce, Florida jury in May 2024. However, the judge set that trial date before the amended indictment added additional charges and De Oliveira as a defendant to the case. Because of this, this case may also still be postponed, though Smith insists that the trial should proceed before the 2024 US presidential election in November 2024.

US Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith’s 2020 Presidential Election Interference Case

On August 1, a federal grand jury indicted Trump on four criminal charges in yet another case led by Smith. In this case, Trump faces four obstruction charges for conspiring to and participating in efforts to overturn the 2020 US presidential results.

In the indictment, Smith alleges Trump perpetrated three criminal conspiracies in the aftermath of the 2020 US presidential election, including:

1. Conspiring to defraud the US through dishonesty, fraud and deceit in an effort to impair, obstruct and defeat the process by which votes are collected, counted and certified by the federal government;
2. Conspiring to corruptly obstruct and impede the US Congress in their effort to collect, count and certify election results on January 6, 2021; and
3. Conspiring against US citizens’ right to vote and to have that vote count.

While the indictment lists six unnamed co-conspirators, Trump is the only charged criminal defendant in this case. Though there has been wide speculation that at least five of the other six co-conspirators are former Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and Sidney Powell along with former US Department of Justice (DOJ) official Jeffrey Clark and pro-Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro.

In the indictment, Smith alleges that Trump conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election through unlawful means. While the election was close, current US President Joe Biden won by a margin of over 7 million votes across the country. During the election, several key states—known as “swing states” for their tendency to swing between majority Democrat and majority Republican vote results—were at the center of national coverage. Those states included Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. After the election, those same swing states became the target of Trump’s attempts to overturn the election.

According to the indictment, Trump perpetrated this conspiracy at both the state and federal level. At the state level, Trump and his allies recruited slates of “false electors”—people who swore to put forward Trump’s name in their state’s election certification process, despite Trump losing the popular vote in their state. Trump then pressured officials at the federal level, including officials at the DOJ, to instill doubts in the American public’s confidence in the 2020 election process. Trump’s plan, according to the indictment, was to interrupt the state’s certification process enough to insert his false electors into the process.

When that failed, however, Trump then doubled down on his federal level efforts by turning to his Vice President, Mike Pence. Trump and his allies attempted to convince Pence to use his ceremonial role during the January 6, 2021 congressional certification of the states’ votes to disrupt the process. The plan was to either to recognize Trump’s false slates of electors instead of the legitimate results, or send the vote counts back to the states for review—in other words, delay the certification.

Once Trump figured out that Pence would not go along with his plan, however, the indictment alleges that Trump “exploited” his followers gathered in Washington DC on January 6, 2021. Those same followers later stormed and entered the Capitol, where Pence and US lawmakers were attempting to certify the election results.

Underlying all of this is Smith’s assertion that Trump knew he had lost the 2020 US presidential election and still continued to pursue unlawful means of contesting and overturning the results. Smith documents how time and time again, trusted advisors and people close to Trump told him that he had lost the election. The indictment also documents how Trump seemed to acknowledge he had lost. Trump’s mindset during this time is crucial because, in order to prove the charges the grand jury brought against Trump, Smith must prove that Trump had a criminal mindset.

Trump himself has admitted no wrongdoing, entering a plea of not guilty. As a result, the case is currently slated to proceed to trial. However, Trump’s legal counsel and federal prosecutors disagree as to when trial should begin. Trump’s legal counsel requested an April 2026 start date, while federal prosecutors requested January 2024. The judge in the case has not yet decided upon a date, but a decision on the matter is expected on August 28.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ 2020 Presidential Election Interference in Georgia Case

A Georgia grand jury handed down the fourth indictment against Trump on August 14. In this case, Trump faces 13 criminal charges under Georgia state law for his alleged conspiracy to interfere in Georgia’s election process during the 2020 US presidential election.

Like Smith’s federal election interference case against Trump, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ indictment alleges Trump conspired with at least 18 other individuals to disrupt Georgia’s election certification process. All 18 of those individuals are also indicted alongside Trump. Unlike Smith’s case, Willis relies upon Georgia state criminal law, as opposed to federal criminal law. Included in the state criminal charges against Trump in this case are:

• 1 count under the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act
• 3 counts of solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer
• 1 count of conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
• 2 counts of conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
• 2 counts of conspiracy to commit false statements and writings
• 2 counts of false statements and writings
• 1 count of conspiracy to commit filing false documents
• 1 count of filing false documents

The 18 individuals indicted alongside Trump allegedly participated in Trump’s “criminal enterprise” by attempting to interfere in Georgia’s 2020 US presidential election process on Trump’s behalf. As a result, all 18 co-defendants face their own counts under Georgia’s RICO Act, which was historically used to prosecute mobsters. Included among Trump’s 18 co-defendants are former Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, as well as former Trump administration officials like chief of staff Mark Meadows and DOJ official Jeffrey Clark.

Tying all of these co-defendants to Trump is Willis’ claim that all 19 engaged in a criminal conspiracy to prevent Georgia election workers and officials from certifying the 2020 US presidential election. While the election in Georgia was a close race, a majority of voters in the state did cast their ballot for current President Joe Biden.

After this became clear in early November 2020, Trump allegedly enlisted the support of his 18 co-defendants to commit at least 161 criminal acts—as described in the indictment in support of the RICO Act charge. The indictment details how Trump and his co-defendants harassed election workers, created and disseminated a false slate of electors, stole election data from the state and pressured state officials to disrupt the election certification process. The indictment also details how members of this alleged criminal enterprise attempted to obstruct Willis’ investigation that resulted in the indictment.

The indictment also includes actions committed by Trump and his 18 co-defendants outside the state of Georgia, including states such as Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. In all six of these states the election results of the 2020 US presidential race were also incredibly close. Ultimately, Biden won the race in all six states, which made them a target for Trump’s alleged election interference efforts.

Despite this alleged interference occurring outside of Fulton County, Georgia—beyond Willis’ jurisdiction—she alleges in the indictment that the actions were apart of Trump’s criminal enterprise to interfere in Georgia’s elections. Therefore, she argued and the grand jury agreed, Trump and his co-defendants’ actions beyond Georgia are within the scope of the indictment.

Though he has not yet done so, Trump is expected to appear before a Georgia judge and enter a not guilty plea on Thursday, August 24. Afterwards, he will be released on a $200,000 bond, meaning he will not remain in Georgia authorities’ custody ahead of his trial date. The 18 other co-defendants have until Friday, August 25 to appear in court as well. Willis indicated that she would like to try all 19 co-defendants in the case at the same time, though a judge may choose to sever certain defendants and others may strike plea deals. Whatever defendants do proceed to trial, it will eventually be held in an Atlanta, Georgia courtroom. Notably, this is the only trial where cameras may be permitted within the courtroom to capture the trial, as it happens, for the public.

—

So while a US president has never before been tried as a criminal defendant in an American court of law, within the span of the next two years, it is entirely possible that the American public will watch a former president stand trial on criminal charges in four separate jurisdictions. The unprecedented nature of these indictments is underscored even more by the fact that, amidst all of the court filings and appearances, Trump remains the leading candidate for the Republican party in the 2024 US presidential elections. There is a very real chance that Americans will vote for, and potentially elect, a candidate facing serious prison time on criminal charges.

Because there is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits him from doing so, there is a very real future in which the US president potentially serves out at least a portion—if not all—of his term from a federal or state prison. It all stands to be seen. Through it all, JURIST will continue to cover and shed light upon the issue.