by Washington, D.C. – A former Department of Justice (DOJ) employee was found not guilty after being charged with assault for throwing a sandwich at a federal officer in downtown Washington, D.C. earlier this year. The trial has sparked discussions on the boundaries of political protest and law enforcement authority.
Sean Dunn, who worked as an international affairs specialist in the DOJ’s criminal division, was accused of hitting a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent with a sandwich during an incident in August 2025. The charges included assaulting and interfering with a federal officer, but the jury ultimately rejected the prosecution’s case after deliberating for about seven hours.
The Incident and Trial Highlights
During the August event, Dunn threw a Subway sandwich striking the federal officer in the chest outside a nightclub. Video footage of the altercation quickly went viral, drawing public attention and stirring debate. Dunn’s defense team maintained that the act was a symbolic gesture protesting the deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C. under President Donald Trump’s administration, rather than a violent attack.
“It was a harmless gesture at the end of him exercising his right to speak out,” stated Julia Gatto, Dunn’s defense attorney. “He is overwhelmingly not guilty.”
Dunn’s Statement and Community Reaction
Upon hearing the verdict, Dunn expressed his motivations rooted in defending immigrant rights, emphasizing unity and inclusiveness. “The Great Seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he said, “That means, from many, one, every life matters, no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”
His actions resonated with many residents in the capital who opposed the National Guard’s presence, with some hailing him as a hero for standing against what they viewed as an overreach of federal power during a tense political period.
Read Also: Tragic UPS Cargo Plane Crash in Kentucky Claims 12 Lives, Engine Detachment Raises Safety Concerns
Legal Perspectives and Background
Prosecutors argued that political dissent did not excuse what they defined as assault and resistance against law enforcement. Despite this, jurors sided with the defense’s portrayal of Dunn’s act as a form of peaceful protest. Dunn’s employment at the DOJ and the political context of the incident added layers of complexity to the case.
Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly announced Dunn’s dismissal from the DOJ, labeling him on social media as “an example of the Deep State.”
For further details on this case, refer to the original report on Fox News.
Key Facts To Remember
- Sean Dunn threw a sandwich at a federal officer in August 2025.
- The act was a protest against National Guard deployment in Washington, D.C.
- He was charged with multiple offenses but was found not guilty.
- Dunn was fired from his Department of Justice position following the incident.
- His legal defense argued that the gesture was symbolic and non-violent.
What This Means Going Forward
This verdict underscores ongoing tensions between protest rights and law enforcement authority in politically charged environments. It also raises questions about how symbolic acts of dissent are interpreted legally and socially.
What do you think about this case and its implications on protest rights? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
