Florida AG pursues Fauci investigation despite federal pardon, cites potential criminal liability

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced that his office is pursuing an investigation into Dr. Anthony Fauci on multiple fronts—examining potential fraud, deceptive trade practices, and public nuisance claims—despite the federal pardon Fauci received from President Biden in January. Speaking on a Sunday morning news program, Uthmeier made clear that his investigators intend to deploy every available tool under Florida law to determine whether Fauci engaged in self-dealing or profited from policies implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The distinction matters legally and politically. Biden's pardon, issued on January 19, 2025, covers all actions Fauci took between January 1, 2014, and that date. But it is a federal pardon only. It provides no shield against prosecution under state law, leaving Fauci potentially exposed to charges brought by Florida authorities. Uthmeier seized on this opening, suggesting the investigation could uncover grounds for criminal liability if evidence emerges that Fauci made money while, in his view, perpetrating fraud against the American public.

When asked directly whether he believed Fauci had committed a crime, Uthmeier declined to commit. "I can't say that right now," he said. But he did not mince words about his broader assessment. He described Fauci's conduct as "horrific," citing deaths and injuries he attributed to the doctor's policies, and invoking the personal suffering of Americans unable to attend births or funerals. "If he is making money on the side while perpetrating this fraud, there could very well be criminal liability," Uthmeier said, signaling that financial gain would be a key focus of the probe.

The investigation gained momentum following Fauci's recent appearance before Congress. During that hearing, Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times, declining to answer questions from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted along party lines to recommend charging him with contempt for his refusal to testify. Uthmeier used that moment to underscore his skepticism. "I don't know why you need a pardon if you didn't do anything wrong," he said, framing Fauci's silence and the pardon itself as evidence of consciousness of guilt.

Uthmeier's stated approach is comprehensive. He said his office would examine the matter through civil litigation, criminal prosecution, and every other avenue Florida law provides—from public nuisance statutes to fraud and deceptive trade practice claims. The investigation remains in its early stages, and no criminal wrongdoing has been established. Fauci, who served as the principal architect of the federal government's COVID-19 response, did not respond to requests for comment. What emerges from Florida's investigation will likely depend on whether Uthmeier's team can produce evidence of financial enrichment tied to the policies Fauci championed—a threshold that remains unmet as the probe continues.