Key findings of an AP analysis examining federal prosecutions of protesters

The Justice Department’s aggressive prosecution strategy against immigration protesters appears to be faltering in courtrooms across the country, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal cases brought since the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term.

Since May, federal prosecutors have pursued 166 criminal cases against protesters in four Democratic-led cities that have been focal points of demonstrations against the administration’s immigration policies. The Justice Department’s approach, characterized by serious felony charges and rhetoric describing defendants as dangerous extremists, has yielded disappointing results for the government.

Attorney General Pam Bondi had pledged that those who assault or interfere with federal officers during protests would face “severe consequences.” However, the AP’s investigation reveals that prosecutors have struggled to make these charges stick.

In a striking finding, more than half of the felony assault cases against federal agents have collapsed. Of 100 people initially charged with felony assaults, 55 saw their charges either reduced to misdemeanors or dismissed entirely. Prosecutors often failed to secure grand jury indictments necessary for felony prosecutions, while video evidence and testimony frequently contradicted initial allegations made by federal agents.

The AP’s analysis found that in numerous cases, officers suffered minor or no injuries, undermining a critical element of felony assault charges that requires potential for serious bodily harm. For example, prosecutors dropped charges against 70-year-old Air Force veteran Dana Briggs after video emerged showing federal agents knocking him to the ground during a Chicago protest.

Similarly, charges were abandoned against 28-year-old Lucy Shepherd, who had been accused of felony assault after brushing aside an officer’s arm during a demonstration outside Portland’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. Her lawyers successfully argued that video showed she used “too little force to have been intended to inflict any kind of injury.”

Despite these setbacks, Justice Department spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre defended the department’s approach, stating, “We will not tolerate any violence directed toward our brave law enforcement officials who are working tirelessly to keep Americans safe.”

The administration has deployed or attempted to deploy troops to Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, Portland, and Chicago—the four cities examined in the AP’s investigation. President Trump has repeatedly characterized immigration protesters as members of “antifa,” which he has sought to designate as a “domestic terrorist organization.”

However, the AP found only scattered references to “antifa” in court records, and not a single case where federal authorities formally accused a protester of being a “domestic terrorist” or part of an organized effort to attack federal agents. This undermines the administration’s public rhetoric about the nature of the demonstrations.

Perhaps most embarrassing for the Justice Department has been its track record in completed trials. Prosecutors have lost all five misdemeanor cases that went to trial, an outcome legal experts find shocking given the department’s typically high conviction rate.

“When the DOJ tries to take a swing at someone, they should hit 99.9% of the time. And that’s not happening,” said Ronald Chapman II, a defense attorney experienced in federal court.

Among these defeats was the case against Sean Charles Dunn, a Washington, D.C., man acquitted after a two-day trial for throwing a sandwich at a Border Patrol agent he had called a “fascist.” In Los Angeles, 32-year-old Katherine Carreño was acquitted of misdemeanor assault after social media video contradicted prosecutors’ claims about her interaction with an officer during a protest.

Still, the Justice Department continues to pursue cases aggressively. Prosecutors have secured felony indictments against 58 individuals accused of assaulting federal officers through various means, including throwing objects, physical attacks, and shooting paintballs. None of these cases have yet gone to trial.

The Department of Homeland Security reports 238 assaults on Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel nationwide during Trump’s second term through late November, though the agency declined to provide details about how it defines such assaults.

“Rioters and other violent criminals have threatened our law enforcement officers, thrown rocks, bottles, and fireworks at them, slashed the tires of their vehicles, rammed them, ambushed them, and even shot at them,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, defending the administration’s enforcement approach.

Legal experts like Mary McCord, former federal prosecutor and director of Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy, see political motivations behind the prosecution strategy. “It’s clear from this data that the government is being extremely aggressive and charging for things that ordinarily wouldn’t be charged at all,” McCord said. “They appear to want to chill people from protesting against the administration’s mass deportation plans.”