Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill orders state review of Anthony Fauci after prior deposition testimony, joining similar investigations in Alabama and Florida

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill announced on Sunday that the state will investigate whether former public-health official Anthony Fauci committed state crimes, citing what she characterized as false testimony under deposition. Murrill said the decision follows an earlier, high-profile U.S. Senate hearing that she said raised questions about Fauci’s statements and whether they were misleading.

Under the announcement, Louisiana will join Alabama and Florida, which have previously said they are pursuing similar inquiries. Murrill did not describe the specific statutes in the report, but said her office is looking into whether Fauci’s deposition testimony could amount to violations under Louisiana law.

The allegation at the center of the investigation is Murrill’s claim that Fauci lied under deposition. The report described that claim as the basis for launching the Louisiana review and for asking whether the conduct could trigger criminal exposure at the state level.

The Senate hearing referenced in the announcement became a focal point for lawmakers and state officials seeking further accountability, with Murrill linking the Louisiana decision to the questions that the hearing brought to the forefront. The report characterized the hearing as “explosive,” while Murrill’s statement emphasized that the deposition testimony itself is the stated trigger for the state inquiry.

As with other state-led investigations, the practical next steps will typically involve collecting records, reviewing testimony, and determining whether there is sufficient basis for potential enforcement actions. The report did not specify whether Louisiana’s inquiry is limited to document review or whether it includes additional interviews, subpoenas, or other investigative steps.

The case also highlights the way states have attempted to pursue accountability outside federal processes, by focusing on allegations framed as violations of state law rather than addressing issues solely through federal agencies or civil litigation. Federalism questions can arise in such investigations, including the interaction between state criminal authority and earlier federal handling of pandemic-related matters.

Neither the report nor the announcement described any court filing or a specific charge at the time of publication. The development means Louisiana joins an emerging set of state actions that seek to test whether the alleged conduct, as described by state officials, meets the threshold for criminal review under their respective legal frameworks.