Georgia election interference case: Judge drops some charges for Trump, co-defendants

ATLANTA - Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has dismissed two charges against former President Donald Trump and an additional charge against one of his co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case. 

Trump's lead attorney in the racketeering case responded on X writing:

"President Trump and his legal team in Georgia have prevailed once again. The trial court has decided that counts 15 and 27 in the indictment must be quashed/dismissed."

SEE ALSO: Georgia election probe timeline

Attorneys for John Eastman and Shawn Micah Tresher Still argued that their charges were preempted by the federal government's authority over presidential elections under the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause.  

In a ruling on Thursday, Judge McAfee found that while the bulk of the indictment remains intact, three specific counts related to perjury and false filings will be quashed. The judge cited an 1890 U.S. Supreme Court decision which prohibits states from prosecuting individuals for perjury committed in federal court proceedings. 

While the court upheld most of the charges, it acknowledged that the Supremacy Clause bars states from prosecuting certain federal offenses, particularly in cases involving federal court documents. The three dismissed counts involved allegations of attempting to file false documents with a federal court and conspiracy to commit such acts. 

This ruling represents a partial victory for the defense, as three counts were dismissed, but the majority of the charges in the indictment remain. 

A spokesperson for Willis said prosecutors are reviewing the order and declined to comment.

Eastman and Still: Charges dismissed 

At issue in Thursday’s ruling are two counts having to do with the filing of a document with the federal court in Atlanta that declared that Trump had won the state of Georgia and 16 Republicans who signed the document were the "duly elected and qualified electors" from the state.

Judge McAfee ruled the following counts would be dismissed for Eastman and Still: 

• Count 14 alleges that Still, along with co-defendants David James Shafer and Cathlene Alston Latham criminally filed false documents in December 2020 when they sent by mail a document titled "CERTIFICATE OF THE VOTES OF THE 2020 ELECTORS FROM GEORGIA" to the chief federal judge for the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Georgia, knowing it to be false.
• Count 15 alleges that Eastman, along with former President Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Kenneth Cheseboro, Ray Smith III, Robert Cheeley, and Michael Roman conspired to commit filing a false document between Dec. 6, 2020, and Dec. 14, 2020, by way of submitting the aforementioned document to the chief federal judge for the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Georgia, knowing it to be false.
• Count 27 alleges that Eastman, along with Trump, filed false documents when they submitted a document titled "Verified Complaint for Emergency Injunctive and Declaratory Relief" in federal civil action "Trump v. Kemp" on Dec. 31, 2020, to the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Georgia, knowing it to be false.

Judge Scott McAfee ruled that the state lacks jurisdiction over the charges, which stem from a lawsuit filed in connection to the 2020 election. 

McAfee stated that punishing someone for submitting documents to a federal court would allow a state to interfere with federal court proceedings and "impair the administration of justice in that tribunal to police its own proceedings." As a result, McAfee quashed the charges, calling them "beyond the jurisdiction of this State." 

One of the charges alleged that Trump and Eastman knowingly filed false documents in federal court in Atlanta, which included false statements about the 2020 election in Georgia. McAfee referenced case law indicating that federal perjury statutes govern such complaints, leading him to dismiss that charge as well. 

Four charges stand in Georgia election interference case 

Judge McAfee rejected the defendants' argument that the Electoral Count Act preempted Georgia's indictment overall. The ruling emphasized that the act governs the process of counting electoral votes and does not shield individuals from criminal liability under state law.  

Despite these rulings, the court also found that claims of immunity based on presidential and federal officer immunity were not fully addressed and could be raised later in the proceedings. 

While Judge McAfee ruled that the above charges are reserved solely for the federal courts to decide, the corresponding acts in the original indictment can still be introduced into evidence. A reconciliation between the Act and Georgia law was possible, and there was no conflict preventing the state from prosecuting the defendants for their alleged actions. 

The defendants have not requested a stay of proceedings, unlike other co-defendants who are currently appealing related rulings. 

Six counts dropped against Trump in Georgia in March

Judge McAfee dropped six charges against former President Donald Trump in March. The six charges in question have to do with soliciting elected officials to violate their oaths of office. That includes two charges related to the phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, on Jan. 2, 2021.

"All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have," Trump said.

The six counts are as follows:

• Count Two alleges that multiple defendants solicited elected members of the Georgia Senate to violate their oaths of office on December 3, 2020, by requesting or importuning them to unlawfully appoint presidential electors;

• Count Five alleges that Defendant Trump solicited the Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives to violate his oath of office on December 7, 2020, by requesting or importuning him to call a special session to unlawfully appoint presidential electors;

• Count Six alleges that Defendants Ray Smith and Rudy Giuliani solicited members of the Georgia House of Representatives to violate their oaths of office on December 10, 2020, by requesting or importuning them to unlawfully appoint presidential electors;

• Count 23 alleges that multiple defendants solicited elected members of the Georgia Senate to violate their oaths of office on December 30, 2020, by requesting or importuning them to unlawfully appoint presidential electors;

• Count 28 alleges that Defendants Trump and Mark Meadows solicited the Georgia Secretary of State to violate his oath of office on January 2, 2021, by requesting or importuning him to unlawfully influence the certified election returns; and

• Count 38 alleges that Defendant Trump solicited the Georgia Secretary of State to violate his oath of office on September 17, 2021, by requesting or importuning him to unlawfully decertify the election.

Trump Georgia election interference case: Where does it stand? 

The case against Trump and others appealing an order allowing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to continue prosecuting the case is on hold while the appeal is pending. However, proceedings for Still and Eastman, who are not part of the appeal, will move forward, as ordered. The case against these two defendants remains active. 

In August 2023, a Georgia grand jury returned a 41-count indictment against Trump and 18 co-defendants, accusing them of conspiring to overturn Trump’s narrow 2020 election loss in the state. This case is one of four criminal prosecutions Trump faces. So far, four individuals have pleaded guilty after reaching deals with prosecutors. 

Trump and several defendants sought to have Willis and her office removed from the case, alleging a conflict of interest due to a romantic relationship between Willis and Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor leading the case. McAfee ruled that while no conflict merited disqualification, Wade must step down from the case. The decision has been appealed, with arguments scheduled before the Georgia Court of Appeals in December. 

Additionally, in a separate ruling in July, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that former presidents are entitled to absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts within their constitutional authority. Judge McAfee noted that this issue has not yet been fully briefed or argued in the case at hand.