PALO ALTO, Calif. — Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen has filed felony vandalism and conspiracy to trespass charges against a group of Stanford University students and alumni who broke into the university president’s office on June 5, 2024, to protest Stanford’s investments in companies associated with Israel.
The protest was part of a nationwide wave of campus demonstrations in spring 2024, as students mobilized in support of the Palestinian cause and denounced university investment portfolios linked to Israel.
As the protests spread, tensions escalated between students on one side and university administrators, local law enforcement and the federal government on the other, culminating in a series of high-profile crackdowns criticized for their heavy-handedness, according to Bolts Magazine.
Against that backdrop, the felony charges filed against 12 Stanford students and alumni on April 10, 2025, stood out for their severity, making Rosen “the only prosecutor in the country to try a felony case against pro-Palestine student protesters since the campus movement began,” according to Bolts Magazine.
Bolts noted that the prosecution of the Stanford protesters on felony charges, along with San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ decision to prosecute “a similar case,” represents a clear departure from past practice. The outlet described the use of such charges as “a notable escalation in charging against nonviolent demonstrators.”
The magazine argued the cases reflect an “apparent double [standard] in how law enforcement deal with pro-Palestinian speech and activism.” A legal expert cited by Bolts said, “This crime that’s really been developed to go after secret group criminality—think mafia, drug crime, that kind of thing—is now really effective at going after social movements and coordinated action amongst activists.”
Even accounting for the Free Speech Movement of the 1960s and its many protests, including at the University of California, Berkeley, where “students were arrested en masse,” and at Stanford, where the university pursued “disciplinary and civil penalties against its students,” the use of felony charges against protesters is without precedent. In the Berkeley cases, “any misdemeanor charges were later dropped,” and at Stanford, criminal charges were not filed “even in cases with allegations of arson and vandalism,” according to Bolts.
One accused individual, German Gonzalez, described the seriousness of the charges and the potential impact on his future. “My parents invested so much time, energy and resources into me so that we could have the possibility of me getting a good job and helping us get out of poverty,” he said. He added that while his parents are “heartbroken,” they are also understanding and supportive of his actions.
Bolts Magazine also reported that the inclusion of conspiracy charges is “particularly concerning.” Such charges make it “easier to convict someone” and “[expand] what can be [brought in] as evidence—including material that would normally count as speech protected under the First Amendment.”
Attorneys interviewed by Bolts said this raises significant concerns about what constitutes protected speech and how it may be treated in court.
Those attorneys further asserted that the prosecutions mark a significant shift from prior legal responses to student demonstrations in Northern California, particularly when compared with the Free Speech Movement that began at UC Berkeley in the 1960s.
With a verdict “expected any day now,” Bolts Magazine reported that “critics fear that the entire situation could have a chilling effect on protest elsewhere.”
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
