Jury Deadlocked in Trial of Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators at Stanford

A judge declared a mistrial after a jury could not reach a verdict in a case involving five current and former students charged with felonies.

Published on Feb. 14, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A California judge declared a mistrial on Friday in the case of five current and former Stanford University students charged with felony vandalism and felony conspiracy to trespass in connection with pro-Palestinian protests on campus in 2024. The jury deadlocked, with nine jurors for and three against convicting on the vandalism charge, and eight for and four against convicting on conspiracy. The district attorney plans to retry the case.

Why it matters

The Stanford case was among the most severe charges leveled at participants in pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses in 2024, when more than 3,000 people were arrested at protests and encampments across the country, mostly facing misdemeanor charges or having charges dropped. The inability to reach a verdict highlights the complexities around balancing free speech, civil disobedience, and property damage in these types of protests.

The details

On June 5, 2024, police arrested 13 people in connection with breaking into the office of the Stanford president early that morning and barricading themselves inside. They had made several demands, including that the university trustees vote on whether to divest from companies that support Israel's military. They were cleared out of the building and arrested within a few hours, but not before they had broken windows and furniture, disabled security cameras and splashed fake blood inside the building.

  • On June 5, 2024, police arrested 13 people in connection with the protests at Stanford.
  • The trial took place in Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2026.

The players

Jeff Rosen

The district attorney for Santa Clara County who plans to retry the case.

Anthony Brass

A lawyer for one of the protesters, Hunter Taylor-Black, who said he was gratified to see the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict to convict.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This case is about a group of people who destroyed someone else's property and caused hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage. That is against the law, and that is why we will retry the case.”

— Jeff Rosen, District Attorney (nytimes.com)

“This is a win for these young people of conscience and a win for free speech. We also hope that this sends a message that humanitarian activism has no place in a criminal courtroom.”

— Anthony Brass, Lawyer (nytimes.com)

What’s next

The court has set a conference date for later this month to pick a new trial date.

The takeaway

The inability to reach a verdict in the Stanford case highlights the ongoing tensions and complexities around balancing free speech, civil disobedience, and property damage in pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses. The retrial will likely continue to be a closely watched case that explores the boundaries of acceptable protest tactics.