Federal and State Charges Escalate Williston ICE Protest Dispute

Key points

• Five individuals, including Peter Booth, Lexington Kennedy, Henry Prensky, Roan Wade, and Sherri Wormser, were charged in federal court with knowingly obstructing access to a federally leased building in Williston.
• The federal charges stem from actions taken during protests on February 9, May 14, and July 24, 2026, where protesters allegedly blocked doors and ignored dispersal orders from Vermont State Police.
• Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark’s office brought state trespassing charges against 12 protesters after Chittenden County State’s Attorney Sarah George declined to prosecute the cases.
• The federal charges carry a potential penalty of up to 30 days in jail and a $5,000 fine, while state trespassing charges carry a maximum of three months in jail or a $500 fine.
• Activists and some Democratic officials criticized the prosecutions as an attempt to chill free speech, while Governor Phil Scott defended the Attorney General’s decision to uphold the law.

Background

This development follows a pattern of protests at the National Criminal Analysis and Targeting Center in Williston, which houses an ICE intelligence facility. Previous protests in February, April, and May resulted in arrests but no state charges, as the local prosecutor declined to pursue the cases. The current escalation marks the first time protesters have faced formal charges in this series of demonstrations.

How outlets are covering it

WCAX and Seven Days Vermont reported the federal charges as a significant escalation in the government’s response to the protests, noting the potential penalties for the defendants. VTDigger highlighted the conflict between the state’s attorney and the attorney general, emphasizing the political implications of the AG’s decision to bypass local prosecutors. The Dartmouth focused on the impact on student protesters, noting that four of the charged individuals were Dartmouth students, and highlighted the logistical challenges faced by the defendants in preparing for their arraignments. All sources agreed that the protesters maintained their stance that the actions were a form of civil disobedience aimed at reducing ICE’s capacity to harm communities.

Why it matters

The case highlights the growing tension between federal and state authorities in handling protests against ICE operations. It also raises questions about the balance between enforcing property rights and protecting the right to protest, particularly in the context of national debates over immigration enforcement and civil liberties.

What to watch

The five federal defendants have not yet had their initial court dates set, while the 12 state defendants are scheduled for a hearing on December 16. Activists have announced a 'week of action' from October 4 to 9, which includes further protests at federal facilities in Williston. The outcome of these cases could set a precedent for how future protests at ICE facilities are handled in Vermont and potentially elsewhere.