If you have been charged in federal court for interfering with ICE agents or other federal law enforcement officers, you are not being charged with merely protesting. 

Notwithstanding the First Amendment, federal prosecutions for acts of civil disobedience can involve serious felony charges, including under 18 U.S.C. § 111 for “assaulting, resisting, or impeding” federal officers and related charges for conspiracy, property damage, and obstruction of justice. A conviction can result in a felony record, years in federal prison, and immigration consequences for non-citizens.

At The Church Law Firm, our experienced federal criminal defense attorneys provide aggressive, strategic representation to individuals accused of federal civil disobedience and protest-related offenses.

What usually happens in a federal criminal case? Watch Tom Church explain in this video.

Confused about the Federal Sentencing Guidelines? Watch Tom Church explain in this video.

In many protest and civil disobedience cases involving officers from ICE, DHS, or other federal agencies, prosecutors rely on 18 U.S.C. § 111. In plain terms, this statute makes it a federal crime to:

• Forcibly assault
• Resist
• Oppose
• Impede
• Intimidate, or
• Interfere with

a federal officer who is performing his or her “official duties.” As you might expect, an officer’s “official duties” is broadly defined.

In the context of protests against federal law enforcement officers, § 111 is frequently charged when agents claim that protestors:

• Surrounded or blocked a federal vehicle
• Physically obstructed access to a federal building or facility
• Pushed against, grabbed, or made (even minimal) physical contact with an officer
• Hit or damaged a government vehicle or equipment
• Conspired or worked together to impede officers or commit damage to federal property.

Any of these serious allegations can change the course of your life.

While charges for assaulting a federal officer can involve any officer from any federal agency, we have seen a trend of cases involving ICE agents as the federal agency ramps up its mass deportation operations. 

Protest and civil disobedience cases involving ICE agents often follow similar patterns:

Blocking a federal officer’s vehicle

• Protesters gather around an officer’s car or van, stand in front of it, or sit in the roadway. Agents later claim they were “trapped,” “prevented from leaving,” or “forced to drive extremely slowly” to avoid hitting anyone.

Using a vehicle to flee or break contact

• During an attempted immigration arrest or traffic stop, the driver accelerates away with officers at the door, drags an officer who is partially inside the car, or collides with a pursuing government vehicle. DOJ routinely treats the car itself as a “dangerous weapon” and charges as a felony under § 111(b).

Forming a human chain or blockade

• Demonstrators link arms across a driveway, loading dock, or access road to an ICE facility. Federal agents allege that they were unable to enter or exit without physically moving protesters, and that this “forcibly impeded” their duties.

Contact with the vehicle or officer

• In the chaos of a protest, people may bang on the hood, place hands on a moving vehicle, or come into brief contact with officers’ equipment. These brief moments are often magnified in reports and affidavits and become the basis for a § 111 felony charge.

Alleged property damage or graffiti

• Writing on, scratching, or otherwise marking a vehicle or building, even when intended as political expression, is frequently charged as damage to government property and cited as evidence of “forcible” interference under § 111.

Each of these scenarios raise distinct legal issues. The government may characterize an entire protest event as “violent obstruction.” The same incident may also lead to charges such as:

• Conspiracy to impede federal officers under 18 U.S.C. § 372
• Destruction or depredation of government property under 18 U.S.C. § 1361
• Civil disorder under 18 U.S.C. § 231 in some protest-heavy cases
• Plus state and local protest-related offenses such as trespass, obstruction, riot, disorderly conduct, or failure to comply with a lawful order

Under federal law, § 111 covers a range of conduct and penalties for violations:

Misdemeanor “simple assault”

• Where there is no weapon, no serious bodily injury, and no meaningful physical contact, § 111 can be treated as a misdemeanor. Even then, you face the possibility of custody, probation, and a federal conviction. The federal government may use misdemeanor § 111 charges as a “scare tactic” to deter protesters.

Felony assault on a federal officer

The statute allows enhanced penalties where there is:

• Significant physical contact with the officer
• Use of a deadly or dangerous weapon
• Serious bodily injury
• Intent to commit another felony

In many recent ICE protest cases, prosecutors have initially charged the felony version based on allegations of pushing, bracing against a vehicle, or causing damage to government property. 

Through careful review and negotiation, a strong defense can push back on those charges to:

• Show that there was no significant physical contact
• Demonstrate that any damage was limited or contested
• Undercut claims that anyone intended to commit another felony or cause injury

A case involving assault charges based on protesting requires more than a generic defense. It requires a methodical analysis of video, reports, the text of federal statutes, and an understanding of how to frame civil disobedience in a federal courtroom. When we take on a case involving alleged interference with ICE or other federal agents, we focus on several core questions.

1. What did you actually do?

The government’s indictment may characterize you as part of “the crowd” or “the protesters.” Federal juries, however, decide cases based on individual conduct. We examine:

• All available video (facility cameras, body-cams, dash-cams, media footage, and bystander phones)
• The precise location of each person in the moments that matter
• Whether your actions involved actual physical force and to what extent
• Whether others in the crowd, not you, were responsible for any contact or damage the government is emphasizing

Our goal is to narrow the focus from what happened that day to what can be proven about this individual defendant.

2. Was there actually “force” or only passive resistance?

Section 111 is not intended to criminalize every act of non-compliance. There is a legal difference between:

• Passive resistance (standing in place, sitting in the road, refusing to move), and
• Forcible conduct (pushing, grabbing, striking, or making a threatening display of physical aggression).

In many ICE protest cases, that line is blurred in reports and affidavits. We work to:

• Highlight moments that show calm, non-threatening behavior
• Challenge exaggerated descriptions of “pushing” or “attacking” when the footage does not match
• Show that any contact was incidental, mutual, or the result of officers moving through a crowded space

The more the evidence looks like passive civil disobedience rather than force, the stronger your position becomes.

3. Is this a felony § 111 case, or at most a misdemeanor?

Under federal law, § 111 covers both:

• Misdemeanor “simple assault” (no weapon, no serious bodily injury, no meaningful physical contact), and
• Felony conduct (significant physical contact, use of a weapon, serious injury, or intent to commit another felony).

Prosecutors may initially charge the felony version. Through careful review and negotiation, we can push the case back toward the misdemeanor end of the spectrum by:

• Showing that there was no significant physical contact with the officer
• Demonstrating that there was no serious or lasting damage to property
• Undercutting claims that anyone intended to commit another felony or cause injury

For many clients, the difference between a felony and misdemeanor outcome is the difference between prison and probation, or between a career-ending conviction and a more manageable path forward.

4. What other charges and collateral issues are in play?

ICE-related protest cases frequently involve multiple overlapping issues:

• Additional federal counts – conspiracy, property damage, obstruction of justice, or false statements
• State or local charges – trespass, obstruction, or riot statutes brought in parallel
• Immigration risks – for non-citizens, any conviction tied to ICE or immigration enforcement can have significant consequences

A comprehensive defense strategy addresses each piece. In some cases, that means litigating aggressively in federal court while resolving local charges. In others, it involves coordinating with immigration counsel to avoid avoidable collateral damage.

Our attorneys have extensive experience in federal criminal litigation, including serious felony charges, complex conspiracy cases, and constitutional issues that arise when political activity and criminal law intersect.

We are based in Atlanta, Georgia, and represent clients in federal courts across the United States.

If you have been charged for interfering with ICE or federal officers you should speak with an attorney experienced in federal prosecutions as soon as possible. Call The Church Law Firm at (404) 223–3310 or use our online Contact Us form to schedule a confidential case evaluation. We will review your charges, discuss the evidence, and provide a clear, direct assessment of how we can help.