DOJ Loses Nearly Every Protester Assault Trial

"Prosecutors tend to win because they control what cases they pursue and they have a lot of resources and discretion," said Mary Fan, a former federal prosecutor and law professor at the University of Washington. The government's failure to win a single felony assault conviction at trial, she said, calls into question "whether or not these charges should have ever been brought in the first place."

The Justice Department said in a statement that prosecutors are right to prioritize cases against people accused of assaulting federal officers and that "each case is based on the facts." It added: "If there are mitigating factors identified in a case, then prosecutors must also act appropriately to inform the court, and in some cases downgrade or drop charges."

The U.S. Attorney's office overseeing Los Angeles said it brought the prosecutions in response to a "wave of violence against law enforcement officers who were doing their jobs," and that it voluntarily dismissed charges against some defendants after further investigation. The U.S. Attorney's offices in the Northern District of Illinois, the District of Columbia and Oregon did not respond to requests for comment.

Jonathan Caravello, a lecturer at California State University Channel Islands who was acquitted after a three-day trial, said of the charges: "They're trying to get a chilling effect out of these charges." Rabbitt, whose case was dismissed days before trial, said, "I'm proud that we won this case, not just for us, but for protesters across the country."

Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor and professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said pleading felony assault down to a misdemeanor is rare and can signal overcharging. "I think when prosecutors bring charges ethically, they should be prepared to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt," she said.