SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
washington state
'By This Logic, Any Protest Could Be a Conspiracy': Conviction of Spokane ICE Protesters Raises Free Speech Concerns
"We were guinea pigs," said the father of one of the convicted protesters. "They brought the swamp of Washington, DC, into our area to stop American citizens from exercising our rights that are guaranteed."
May 29, 2026
With the conviction of three anti-ICE protesters in Spokane, Washington on federal "conspiracy" charges Thursday, civil rights advocates and legal experts fear that the Trump administration may have just been handed a powerful tool to criminalize dissent.
Jac Archer, Justice Forral, and Bajun Mavalwalla II, nicknamed the "Spokane 3," were indicted last year for their actions at a protest in June 2025, where they attempted to physically obstruct ICE agents from transporting two Venezuelan immigrants to an ICE processing facility in Tacoma.
Both of the men reportedly entered the US legally under a humanitarian parole program that had been terminated by the Trump administration, leading advocates to protest their detention.
As Spokesman-Review, a Spokane newspaper, described:
Protesters that day eventually began linking arms around vans and in front of agents’ cars. The event grew chaotic. ICE agents entered a crowd of people standing outside the facility’s parking lot gate and began grabbing people by the necks and arms, pushing them to the ground. Protesters also slashed tires of vans meant to transport the detainees.
But where such activity would usually lead to charges against specific protesters for discrete illegal actions like trespassing, property damage, or other public order offenses, the Department of Justice (DOJ)—as part of a nationwide effort to crack down on protests against ICE—charged nine protesters with "conspiracy to impede or injure officers," even though no officers were actually injured during the protest.
Legal experts described it as a novel approach that wrapped many people involved in the protest into a single "conspiracy" regardless of whether they committed specific criminal acts.
“Usually if a protest gets out of hand and people are hurt or property is hurt, you see charges based on that,” Mary Fan, a former federal prosecutor and a University of Washington law professor, told The New York Times earlier this month. “They’re not going after people based on specific harm done. They’re stretching conspiracy charges to target protesters and people who organize protests.”
Facing pressure from the federal government to bring the case following a national memo sent from the DOJ to prioritize and publicize cases against ICE agents, then-acting US Attorney for Eastern Washington Richard Barker resigned last year rather than bring charges against the protesters.
He said at the time he was grateful he “never had to sign an indictment or file a brief that [he] didn’t believe in." His successor, Stephanie Van Marter, however, did sign the order.
Six of the defendants pleaded guilty to the charges to avoid federal prison time. But Archer, Forral, and Mavalwalla chose to fight them, believing the case was part of an unjust attempt to criminalize their right to protest.
After a trial that lasted seven days, a jury found the three defendants guilty of conspiracy. But the defense has argued that the trial was marred by problems that rendered the verdict faulty.
As the Guardian explained:
In February, a federal judge ordered the release of a Venezuelan migrant whose transportation for deportation the protesters sought to block, ruling his arrest violated the constitution.
But the jury, drawn from conservative eastern Washington state, did not hear those facts at trial, thanks to rulings by Judge [Rebecca] Pennell. Pennell, a former federal public defender and appointee of the Democratic president Joe Biden, also ruled the protesters on trial could not use the First Amendment as a defense, though they were allowed to state their reasons for demonstrating.
Instead, the jury watched hours of law enforcement body camera video and heard from a parade of ICE agents... Jeremy Burlingame, an ICE agent who testified, had authored social media posts that called Black politicians “lying ghetto garbage” and transgender people “mentally ill.” He boosted a post showing ICE arresting a pregnant woman at gunpoint that called her a “pregnant invader.”
Federal prosecutors deemed the posts troubling enough to recall Burlingame to impeach him, despite the fact that he was their witness...
But Burlingame’s online posts, the lack of injury to ICE officers, and the absence of evidence showing communication between the three defendants prior to the protest were not enough to sway the jury.
The defendants now face potential sentences of up to six years in prison and a $250,000 fine. However, they are expected to appeal the verdict and have filed a rarely used motion allowing their attorneys to argue that no rational juror could find their clients guilty.
"I question whether justice truly was served by today’s verdict,” Barker told the Spokesman-Review. "This was the first conspiracy prosecution in Eastern Washington history under... a Civil War-era law dusted off to punish members of the Spokane community who stood up for two young men who were unlawfully detained by ICE."
Video by KREM 2 News/Youtube
Looking beyond the details of the trial itself, many observers questioned the very premise of the DOJ's prosecution.
Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown said from the start of the trial she believed it was "politically motivated."
"It was meant to make an example out of people who disagreed with federal immigration policy," she said.
City council member Sarah Dixit, who said she took part in the protest, said: "Based on the evidence that was shown, I personally didn’t see evidence of what they were accused of. Conspiracy is a charge that feels complicated to prove, and I don’t believe that the government made a strong case for that.”
Others expressed fear for the precedent that had been set. La Rond Baker, the legal director of the Washington ACLU, said the Trump administration "has a demonstrable history of using the Department of Justice to silence and punish its critics."
The administration has pursued similar sweeping conspiracy charges against other groups of anti-ICE protesters around the country—including in Los Angeles, Broadview, Illinois, and North Texas.
“The verdict was painfully disappointing,” said Archer’s attorney, Carl Oreskovich. “I think it was an extraordinarily aggressive approach to prosecution of protests. And it certainly is going to chill people who want to utilize their First Amendment right to dissent against government actions that they don’t agree with."
In a comment to The Guardian, Robert Chang, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine School of Law and executive director of its Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, said the verdict was "frightening."
“By this logic, any protest could be a conspiracy,” he said. “The goal posts keep moving.”
Bajun Mavalwalla Sr., a retired US Army intelligence officer who served in Afghanistan, said his son—also a veteran of the same war—and the other two defendants were standing for "the freedoms that separate this country from the dictatorships.”
“People in Spokane and people in Eastern Washington need to understand that we were guinea pigs. That they brought the swamp of Washington, DC, into our area to stop American citizens from exercising our rights that are guaranteed,” the elder Mavalwalla said after his son was convicted.
“It was the whole point of the Constitution, the right to protest, the right to dissent, the right to assemble, all of those things are now in question because of this case," he said. "My son has taken the brunt of the entire weight of the United States government onto their shoulders.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Big Oil Caused the Climate Crisis. Now They Want To Get Out of Paying for It.
Why should we keep footing the bill for a crisis caused by greedy billionaire oil corporations?
May 09, 2026
For decades, major fossil fuel companies have exploited both people and the planet for their own corporate greed, fueling the climate crisis while communities are left to absorb the costs. When floods, wildfires, and heatwaves strike, it is states, local governments, and taxpayers—not corporate polluters—are stuck with the bill.
Communities have had enough of cleaning up Big Oil’s mess, and momentum is growing nationwide to recover the mounting costs of climate change from the companies most responsible for the crisis. States, municipalities, and tribes across the country are taking Big Oil to court for knowingly fueling climate change, and orchestrating a Big Tobacco-style campaign of deception to mislead the public. Washington is home to four climate accountability cases, including the first-ever climate-related wrongful death case, two tribal climate deception cases, and a first-of-its-kind class action suit naming Big Oil’s role in fueling the escalating insurance crisis.
Terrified of facing accountability, the fossil fuel industry is seeking total legal immunity from the legal and legislative efforts communities across the country are pursuing to make polluters pay for the climate costs they’ve enabled for decades. For the past year, Big Oil has been lobbying Congress and the Trump administration for a liability shield that would effectively put the industry above the law, much like the 2005 law protecting gun manufacturers from lawsuits. And they are starting to get their wish.
Climate accountability is our democratic right, and Big Oil’s push for immunity is a power grab to shut us out.
The threat is real. On April 17th, Republican lawmakers in Congress introduced the “Climate Shakedowns Act”, a bill that would shelter the fossil fuel industry from facing accountability, and immunity bills protecting Big Oil have already started to be introduced and passed in Utah, Tennessee, and other states.
If Big Oil receives this ‘get-out-of-jail-free card,’ it would take away our right to hold this harmful industry accountable. Blocking these efforts is dangerous overreach and would set a harmful precedent that protects corporations at the expense of our communities. No corporation should be above the law.
That’s why 32 organizations in Washington state submitted a letter to Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, along with the rest of our congressional delegation, urging them to reject any attempts to give Big Oil immunity.
When catastrophic flooding hits our homes, we’re the ones responsible for paying for repairs and rebuilding, while the recovery costs further strain already overburdened state and local budgets. The climate crisis is deeply interwoven with, and significantly exacerbates, the affordability crisis. Extreme weather events like droughts, floods, wildfires, and heat waves are all becoming a much more common occurrence in Washington. And most often it is hitting low-income and communities of color who are hit the hardest and the least able to recover.
Meanwhile, the major oil and gas companies most responsible for the damages are raking in $3 billion dollars in profits each day. Why should we keep footing the bill for a crisis caused by greedy billionaire oil corporations?
By seeking immunity, these companies are working to silence our efforts to hold them accountable, deny communities their day in court, and override state climate laws. Climate accountability is our democratic right, and Big Oil’s push for immunity is a power grab to shut us out. Washington's lawsuits against Big Oil are grounded in justice and accountability. We must keep fighting for a future where communities are protected, democracy is respected, and corporations are held accountable when they cause harm.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Inspiring': Washington Enacts Millionaires' Tax to Help Working Families
The head of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy praised state policymakers for "listening to the demands of the people to create a less regressive state tax system."
Mar 30, 2026
While nearby California prepares for a November vote to tax the ultrarich, Democratic Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson on Monday signed state legislation that creates a tax on income over $1 million in a single year.
"Adoption of the historic Millionaires' Tax makes our tax system more fair, and means free meals for K-12 students, the largest tax break in state history for small businesses, eliminating the sales tax for baby diapers, and sending a check to nearly 500,000 working families to make life more affordable," Ferguson highlighted in a statement.
Senate Bill 6346, sponsored by state Sen. Jamie Pedersen (D-43), was delivered to the governor earlier this month after passing the upper chamber 27-21. In the Washington House of Representatives, where the companion bill was led by Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon (D-34), it was approved 51-46.
"With this bill, we're going to begin to right a historic wrong that has plagued our state for nearly 100 years, and made our tax system one of the worst and most regressive in the entire country," said Pedersen. "We've asked Washington's working families for far too long to shoulder far too much of the tax burden for the things we care about, and we have not asked enough of our wealthiest neighbors. The Millionaires' Tax represents hope and change for people in communities like mine, and across the state."
Bloomberg reported Monday that before adopting the law, which "applies a 9.9% levy on the roughly 30,000 taxpayers in the state who make more than $1 million a year," Washington was one of just nine states without an income tax
Washington lawmakers previously "made progress in recent years by creating and later enhancing their capital gains excise tax," but its "tax structure has been woefully unequal, ranking as the second-most regressive state and local tax system in the country," according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP).
"Inequality is at a historic high and billionaires are walking away with ever-larger shares of our country’s collective wealth," ITEP executive director Amy Hanauer said in a Monday statement. "With those in charge at the federal level passing policies that only make this worse, it is incumbent upon states to come up with solutions. It is inspiring to see Washington listening to the demands of the people to create a less regressive state tax system."
Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson has officially signed into law a new tax on millionaires.The 9.9% tax on income above $1 million is projected to raise up to $3 billion in 2029 after it takes effect in 2028.That money will go towards public education, child care, and expanding the state's EITC.
— ITEP (@itep.org) March 30, 2026 at 1:25 PM
Last year, congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump used the GOP's narrow majorities to pass a budget package, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, that provided the rich with more tax breaks while slashing programs for working families, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
Ferguson signed Washington's bill as Republicans in Congress prepare for this year's budget package, which they aim to pass ahead of the November midterm elections, and other states and localities consider measures to tax the rich and use the revenue to better serve the working class.
As historian Lawrence Wittner detailed in an opinion piece for Common Dreams last week, "Campaigns for state tax-the-rich legislation are flourishing in California, Colorado, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, and Virginia, and have already succeeded in getting such legislation adopted in Massachusetts and Washington."
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) headed to New York City on Sunday to boost an effort by NYC's newly elected mayor, Zohran Mamdani, to pressure Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul to raise taxes on the rich. He addressed a rally at Lehman College in the Bronx.
"The people of the city, the people of this state, the people of this country, they do not want to see our kids go hungry," Sanders said. "They do not want people to sleep out on the street or lack healthcare. They want the very rich to start paying their fair share of taxes."
At the federal level, Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) earlier this month introduced the Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act. They were followed last week by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), lead sponsors of the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act. However, neither bill is expected to get through the current Congress.
Washington makes history today! Gov. Bob Ferguson just signed the Millionaires Tax into law!For too long, the wealthiest few have paid a smaller share while working families carried the load.
[image or embed]
— Washington State Democrats (@wadems.org) March 30, 2026 at 1:28 PM
Like in Washington, DC, efforts to tax the rich are still facing pushback in Washington state. After Ferguson's signature, Citizen Action Defense Fund announced its intention to sue, with executive director Jackson Maynard declaring that "since lawmakers and the governor have chosen to ignore both the constitution and decades of settled case law, we will act."
According to KUOW, during the bill signing event in Olympia that featured remarks from not only the governor but also the bill sponsors, a small business owner, and a tech executive, Ferguson acknowledged that "there's going to be a public conversation around this in the days and weeks and months ahead, as there should be of something of this historic nature."
"Putting front and center those perspectives you just heard, I think, will be critical," he asserted, "because when Washingtonians hear the benefits that flow to working families, to businesses large and small, to kids in schools with those free meals, for childcare services for thousands of Washington families, it's going to make a huge, huge difference."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular