Federal Conspiracy Charges Test Limits of Immigration Protest Prosecutions

Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Washington have indicted three activists—Bajun Mavalwalla II, Justice Forral, and Jac Archer—for conspiracy to impede or injure federal officers. The indictment arises from a June 11, 2025 protest in Spokane where the trio and other demonstrators attempted to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from moving two Venezuelan immigrants, legally present but subject to immigration warrants, to the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma. Protesters linked arms, built barriers, spray-painted a van’s windows and deflated its tires. Police used smoke grenades and pepper balls, arresting over 30 participants; six others took plea deals.

New York Times

The case reflects the Trump administration’s effort to prioritize immigration-related protest cases and to apply conspiracy statutes to demonstrators not accused of violent conduct. This departs from traditional protest prosecutions that require proof of property damage or bodily harm. The theory prompted the top federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of Washington to resign rather than sign the charges.

New York Times

• June 11, 2025 – Protest in Spokane; activists try to block ICE transport.

New York Times

• June 2025 – Smoke grenades and pepper balls used; >30 arrests; six plea deals.

New York Times

• Early 2026 – Eastern Washington’s top federal prosecutor resigns over the charges.

New York Times

• May 17, 2026 – Trial of the three activists scheduled to begin Monday.

New York Times

The indictment alleges the defendants conspired to impede or injure federal officers by obstructing ICE operations. Prosecutors say the coordinated blocking, defacing and disabling of the van constitute a concerted effort to interfere with federal law-enforcement duties. The Department of Justice issued no comment beyond the charging document.

New York Times

Mary Fan, a former federal prosecutor, says the government is “stretching conspiracy charges to target protesters and people who organize protests,” noting that traditional protest prosecutions depend on demonstrable harm. Other critics warn the case could expand criminal liability for non-violent dissent.

New York Times

The source does not identify the resigning prosecutor, specify the statutory provision used for the conspiracy charge, or provide details on the defendants’ prior records.

New York Times

> “Usually if a protest gets out of hand and people are hurt or property is hurt, you see charges based on that,” said Mary Fan, a former federal prosecutor and a University of Washington law professor. “They’re not going after people based on specific harm done. They’re stretching conspiracy charges to target protesters and people who organize protests.” — Mary Fan, Law Professor

New York Times

The trial, set to begin in May 2026, will test whether the prosecution’s conspiracy theory withstands judicial scrutiny. A conviction could set precedent for future immigration-related protests; an acquittal may curb the use of conspiracy statutes in similar cases.

New York Times