UPDATE (March 30, 5:45 p.m.): On Thursday evening, the New York Times reported that the grand jury in Manhattan voted to indict former President Donald Trump, making him the first former president to face criminal charges. The specific charges have not yet been made public. The three other investigations into Trump remain ongoing; for more information on the four cases, find FiveThirtyEight’s overview of Trump’s legal problems below. Despite a near-constant swirl of legal problems, former President Donald Trump has managed to avoid indictment so far. But one prosecutor seems poised to take the plunge and become the first to criminally indict a former president. Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, is reportedly close to filing charges for Trump’s role in paying hush money to porn actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. But if Bragg ends up being the first prosecutor to indict Trump, will he be the last? That question could turn out to be very significant. After all, it’s a big deal to charge a former president with a crime, but the allegations against Trump in the New York City case are more contained and arguably less important for Trump’s reelection bid than other pending investigations at the local and federal level into his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. “[The Stormy Daniels case] is relatively small-scale compared to other pending investigations,” said Daniel Richman, a former federal prosecutor and law professor at Columbia University. “We’re talking about a reasonably discrete set of financial transactions — not a really serious charge to an institution like the republic.” What emerges from those other investigations over the coming months could prove just as significant for Trump’s future as the case that’s currently in the news — if not more so. Here’s an overview of the cases that could have the biggest impact on Trump, and what they could mean for his political future. In January, Manhattan prosecutors began presenting their case to a grand jury regarding Trump’s role in paying hush money to Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign. Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, who made the payment and was subsequently reimbursed, has testified before the grand jury multiple times during the prosecutors’ presentation of their case, and Trump himself was invited to testify earlier this month — though he opted not to. An invitation for an investigation’s target to testify is usually one of the last steps before an indictment, which means that charges could drop soon. We don’t know what the charges against Trump would actually be, if they materialize at all. The Manhattan DA’s office appears to be focusing on a New York law that prohibits the falsification of business records — a misdemeanor that could become a felony if the records were falsified in service of another crime. That second crime could be a New York state election law, but given that Trump was running as a federal candidate, the legal case could be harder to make. It’s possible that Bragg has other evidence that points to a different crime, but we won’t know until we see the charges. Trump is busily trying to turn the impending indictment to his advantage. Over the weekend, he claimed (with no evidence) that he would be arrested on Tuesday. (That didn’t happen, but the indictment could still come soon.) Since then, Trump and other Republicans have been vigorously attacking Bragg’s integrity as a prosecutor, asserting that the DA — who is a Democrat — is running a “sham” investigation. The extent to which Trump is able to make those criticisms stick will depend a lot on the strength of the case: If the Stormy Daniels case ends up being weak, it could bolster Trump’s argument that Bragg’s case against him is just politically motivated. But his efforts to tie Bragg to the broader Democratic Party — and by extension, President Biden — could be harder to pull off. Charges could also come down at any time in another local investigation involving Trump — this one in Georgia. Fani Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, has been investigating Trump’s efforts to influence the outcome of the 2020 election in Georgia since early 2021, soon after a recording of Trump pressuring Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” extra votes became public. The investigation quickly expanded beyond the phone call to a broader probe into whether Trump allies tried to convene an alternate slate of electors in an effort to overturn the result of the election. Will Trump be charged? That’s the big unanswered question, and we don’t have any more clues than we did in February when Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney ordered the partial release of a special grand jury report from the case. The report revealed that the grand jury had recommended some indictments — but not who the subjects of the indictments were. When she was asked whether Trump was among them, the jury foreperson said, “You’re not going to be shocked. It’s not rocket science.” (The problem, of course, is that jaded political observers can’t be shocked by anything anymore.) Willis and her team are now reportedly considering racketeering and conspiracy charges — but whether they’ll materialize remains to be seen. In the last few days, Trump and his legal team have pushed back aggressively against the case. On Monday, Trump’s lawyers filed a motion to quash the final grand jury report and disqualify Willis’s team from the case. That stance could be reflective of a broader effort to paint Trump as the victim of partisan prosecutors bent on putting an innocent man behind bars, which he has been pushing in fundraising emails. But it could also be a tacit acknowledgment of the danger that the Georgia investigation poses for Trump and his allies. Willis is famous in legal circles for her use of racketeering laws, and some experts have argued that Trump’s risk of criminal prosecution in Fulton County is real. But it’s possible, of course, that Trump himself will escape charges since there are plenty of other people — including Trump allies like Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman — who could be indicted instead. Last December, the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol issued its final report, which included four criminal referrals for Trump. Because Congress can’t issue charges itself, the referrals are really a recommendation for the Department of Justice — which means federal prosecutors aren’t obligated to bring a case against Trump for what the committee called a “multipart scheme” to overturn the 2020 election. The investigation is now in the hands of Jack Smith, the special counsel who also took over a probe of Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents in November after Trump announced he would run for reelection. We know very little about what’s happening inside Smith’s investigation, or what he’s likely to do with the information gathered by the Jan. 6 committee. The Justice Department was already pursuing its own investigation of Trump’s interference with the 2020 election before Smith came on board, or the congressional referrals came through, and it appears that Smith is moving quickly. In early February, he issued a subpoena for former Vice President Mike Pence, which Pence is not challenging in its entirety. Later that month, Smith issued subpoenas for testimony from Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. There’s been speculation that investigators are moving quickly with the hope of wrapping up by the summer before the 2024 presidential campaign kicks into high gear, but that’s not a sure thing. And of course, Smith might not be the ultimate decider about who’s charged, or for what — he can still be overruled by Attorney General Merrick Garland. Trump, predictably, has attacked Smith multiple times since the special counsel was appointed, calling him a “thug” and a “terrorist” on his social media site, Truth Social. But a lot will hinge on what — if anything — he ends up being charged with. The charges recommended by the House committee, which include conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to make a false statement, insurrection and obstruction of an official proceeding, are serious. Being convicted of insurrection, in particular, could preclude Trump from ever holding public office again. But many of the charges (including insurrection) could be hard to prove in court, and the committee itself doesn’t seem to have made a huge impact on public opinion. Relatively few people watched the committee’s hearings, and overall opinion about the attack on the Capitol and Trump’s role hasn’t shifted much since the committee began its work. On the other hand, though, Trump could be politically damaged if charges are filed, since voters report that the Jan. 6 attack remains on their minds as a voting issue for 2024.  Last summer, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago and recovered a number of classified documents, and prosecutors subsequently argued in a court filing that Trump’s legal team tried to conceal documents from investigators in the lead-up to the raid. This part of the investigation is clearly going strong — earlier this month, Smith’s team subpoenaed dozens of Mar-a-Lago staff to testify in front of the grand jury that’s looking into the way Trump handled classified documents after he left the presidency, and Smith is reportedly trying to interview one of Trump’s attorneys about potential obstruction, in spite of claims of attorney-client privilege. Like Smith’s other investigation, it’s clear that this probe is still active — which means that we don’t know when (or if) charges will emerge, or what they’ll be if they happen. One of the potential charges that Trump could face is concealment or destruction of official documents, which includes a ban on holding federal office (and up to three years in prison per offense). However, the federal office ban could be unconstitutional, so it’s unclear what that would mean for Trump even if he was charged and convicted. After last summer’s FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, Republicans rushed to Trump’s defense — much as they’re doing now as the threat of an indictment in the Stormy Daniels case looms. And as my colleague Nathaniel Rakich noted earlier this week, Trump’s favorability ratings barely moved despite wall-to-wall coverage of the raid. Plus, the fact that Biden is also the subject of a special counsel investigation into whether he mishandled classified documents could give Trump some leeway to argue that his actions weren’t out of the ordinary — although the cases are not really comparable on a number of levels. But as with the other federal investigation, the potential impact largely depends on what prosecutors do and if Trump ends up facing criminal charges.