|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Kelley Paul on Thursday ordered the recusal of District Attorney Jeff Rosen and his entire office from retrying a Stanford felony vandalism case, citing a conflict of interest.
Rosen filed felony vandalism and conspiracy charges in April 2025 against 12 Stanford University students and allies, after they allegedly broke into the school president’s office in June 2024 to protest the ongoing killings in Gaza. The case, which critics contended exhibited notably serious punishments for a university protest, ended in a mistrial on Feb. 13.
While some of the defendants took plea or alternative deals, protesters German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Amy Jing Zhai and Hunter Taylor-Black faced charges of felony vandalism and conspiracy to trespass.
After the initial trial ended in a hung jury, Rosen immediately said he will retry the case. Attorneys for the defendants then argued Rosen should be excused after he showcased the lawsuit on a webpage that he dedicated to fighting antisemitism and that he used to garner donations for his 2026 district attorney campaign.
“DA Rosen is not entitled to continue to pursue a case where he falsely describes the prosecution of the defendants as part of his fight against antisemitism while attempting to raise campaign dollars off that false description,” Defense Attorney Avi Singh wrote in court documents.
A link to Rosen’s webpage was sent to over 600 of his Los Angeles County supporters as part of an email blast, which invited recipients to a campaign party in December 2025, just weeks before the trial began, according to Paul. The link, which mentioned multiple times his charges against the Stanford students, was cited as proof of his commitment toward “America, the State of Israel, the Jewish People, and Judaism.”
It is unclear which email recipients donated to his campaign because of the webpage, but court records showed that he raised $10,000 between Dec. 5 and Dec. 31, 2025, Paul said.
While Paul reaffirmed Rosen’s right to free speech and noted passion for fighting antisemitism, she said “caution and care” must be taken when using active litigation for fundraising purposes.
The Stanford lawsuit is “not a hate-crime case,” and should not be characterized as a fight against antisemitism, Paul said.
Attorney General Rob Bonta, who helped represent the District Attorney’s Office, argued that defense attorneys did not prove Rosen’s guilt.
“DA Rosen neither vilified nor defamed defendants and/or their movement while fundraising and simultaneously prosecuting defendants,” Bonta wrote in court documents.
The court also agreed that Rosen’s behavior could have affected Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker’s treatment of the defendants as Baker was leading the prosecution’s case.
At times, he criticized the students’ motivations and at one point called the group “un-American.”
“The court finds a conflict of interest exists,” Paul said.
With the DA’s office forced to recuse, state Office of Attorney General may now take over the trial against the students.
“While we disagree with the judge’s ruling, we respect it,” the DA’s office said in a statement after the ruling.
When he announced the charges against the Stanford students in April 2025, Rosen maintained that he was not charging them because of their message but because of the damage that they caused to the Stanford University office. He also said at that time that he hopes the defendants will not get prison sentences but would be required to take responsibility and make restitution to the university.
“Pouring invective on social media is not against the law,” Rosen said. “Pouring fake blood all over someone else’s workplace is.”
This is a developing story that will be updated.
