A Santa Clara County judge Thursday ordered the District Attorney’s office to turn over records sought by defense attorneys trying to remove District Attorney Jeff Rosen from retrying a felony vandalism case against five pro-Palestinian activists.
The motion was filed earlier this month as part of an effort to bar Rosen and his entire office from retrying five defendants facing felony charges after a 2024 pro-Palestinian protest at Stanford University. Judge Kelley Paul ruled that defendants have a right to the records needed to pursue their conflict of interest claim and that the DA’s office must produce whatever relevant materials it has.
The ruling also allows defense attorneys to issue subpoenas to obtain records from sources beyond the DA’s office. The next hearing to review obtained records is expected by April 20, with a recusal ruling slated for April 27.
“California law provides that a defendant has a due process right not to be prosecuted by a district attorney that has a conflict of interest that renders it unlikely that the defendant would receive a fair trial,” Paul wrote in her ruling.
The recusal motion centers on allegations that Rosen used the high-profile prosecution to raise campaign funds.
The prosecution is among the most serious criminal cases brought nationwide in connection with the wave of pro-Palestinian campus protests that swept the country in 2024. Similar cases at Columbia University, the University of Michigan and UCLA were either dismissed or never pursued criminally.
Deputy Public Defender Avi Singh, who represents defendant German Gonzalez, argued earlier this month that Rosen was “monetizing criminal prosecution” — highlighting the case on his campaign website alongside donation buttons and on a page titled “DA Rosen Fighting Anti-Semitism.”
Paul reviewed a list of records sought by Singh — including donor information from mailing lists, video conferencing metadata, specific donation data beyond what is publicly available and email lists — granting some requests while denying others.
Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker, who represented the office at the hearing, told the court the DA’s office would produce whatever relevant materials it has or verify what it does not have. Baker argued that the DA’s office and Rosen’s campaign are legally separate, denied any political motivation in the prosecution, and noted that campaign donation records are public — adding that the office had already turned over emails between a senior prosecutor and the campaign manager.
Regarding donation records, the court said it would evaluate privacy concerns over individual donors before any such information is released.
The recusal motion is linked to a high-profile felony vandalism case stemming from a June 2024 demonstration in which protesters briefly occupied Stanford University’s executive offices, calling on the school to divest from companies linked to Israel over the war in Gaza. University officials accused demonstrators of causing at least $300,000 in damage.
Though Singh filed the motion on behalf of Gonzalez, all defendants — including those who accepted plea deals or entered diversion programs — joined the effort to remove Rosen.
The five who went to trial are Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor Black and Amy Zhai, known as the “Stanford 5.” The remaining defendants either accepted plea deals or entered diversion programs that could allow charges to be dismissed if they complete certain requirements.
A mistrial was declared Feb. 13 after jurors split 8-4 in favor of guilt on the conspiracy charge and 9-3 on the vandalism charge, falling short of the unanimous verdict required for conviction. If convicted upon retrial, the five defendants could face up to three years in prison and possible restitution.
Stanford has become a flashpoint for pro-Palestinian expression and accusations of antisemitism on campus. Separate subcommittees in 2024 found a basis for alleged antisemitism and anti-Israel bias, as well as documented cases of Islamophobia and discrimination against Muslim, Arab and Palestinian students.
Outside the campus, the case has highlighted how deeply divided views over the war in Gaza have complicated court proceedings, with attorneys clashing over whether political views should influence jury selection, defense arguments or witness testimony.
If the recusal motion is granted, it would be one of the rare instances in Santa Clara County in which an entire district attorney’s office is removed from a case. The attorney general would then decide whether to take over the prosecution or dismiss the charges.