Judge says hate crime prosecution in Boulder, Colorado, attack can proceed
From left, Lisa Turnquist and Carrie Spyva-McIlvaine place a bouquet of flowers at a growing memorial outside of the Boulder County, Colo., courthouse after Sunday's attack Monday, June 2, 2025, in Boulder, Colo. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
DENVER — A federal judge said Wednesday that prosecutors can proceed with a hate crime charge against a man accused of hurling Molotov cocktails at a group of people demonstrating in Boulder, Colorado, in support of Israeli hostages.
Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, appeared in federal court in Denver for a preliminary hearing following the June 1 attack in Boulder that injured at least eight people.
Investigators say he planned the attack for a year and was driven by a desire 'to kill all Zionist people.'
Soliman's defense attorney, David Kraut, urged Magistrate Judge Kathryn Starnella not to allow the case to move forward. Kraut said Soliman's anti-Zionist statements and his online search for a 'Zionist' event to attack showed he targeted the demonstrators because of their perceived political views — their assumed support for the nation of Israel and the political movement of Zionism. An attack motivated by someone's political views is not considered a hate crime under federal law.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Melissa Hindman said the government alleged that the attack was a hate crime because Soliman targeted people based on their national origin — their perceived connection to Israel. Prosecutors are not alleging that Soliman targeted demonstrators, who carried Israeli and American flags, because he believed they were Jewish, noting that he has said that not all Jewish people are Zionists.
Starnella acknowledged that some of the evidence undercut the government's allegation that the demonstrators were targeted because of their perceived national origin but said other evidence supported it. At this stage, the government gets the benefit of the doubt on questions about evidence, she said.
Investigators say Soliman told them he had intended to kill the roughly 20 participants at the weekly demonstration on Boulder's Pearl Street pedestrian mall, but he threw just two of his over two dozen Molotov cocktails while yelling 'Free Palestine.' Soliman told investigators he tried to buy a gun but was not able to because he was not a 'legal citizen.'
Federal authorities say Soliman, an Egyptian national, has been living in the U.S. illegally with his family.
During his Wednesday appearance, Soliman's lower right arm and hand were wrapped in a thick bandage, with handcuffs around his wrists. Police previously said he was taken to a hospital for unspecified injuries right after the attack. FBI agent Timothy Chan testified at Wednesday's hearing that Soliman burned himself as he threw the second Molotov cocktail.
Soliman did not carry out his full plan 'because he got scared and had never hurt anyone before,' police wrote in an arrest affidavit.
At least eight people were injured.
Authorities consider 15 people and a dog as victims of the attack at the downtown Pearl Street pedestrian mall. One is a Holocaust survivor. Some are considered victims because they could have been hurt.
Soliman is charged separately in state court with multiple counts of attempted murder, assault and offenses related to more than a dozen additional Molotov cocktails police say he did not use.
Run for Their Lives, the group targeted in the attack, started in October 2023 after Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip stormed into Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 250 others hostage.
Federal authorities are seeking to deport Soliman's wife and their five children. They range in age from 4 to 18 years old and are being held in an immigration center in Texas, according to court documents.
The White House said in a June 3 social media post that one-way tickets had been purchased for the family members, adding: 'Final boarding call coming soon.'
A Colorado federal judge temporarily blocked their deportation with a restraining order on June 4. The case has since been transferred to Texas, where a federal judge on Wednesday extended the restraining order another two weeks.
Lawyers for the family had asked to keep the order in place, even though government lawyers said in court documents that the family would be deported under the normal process, not an expedited one because the lawyers did not address the earlier comments from the White House.
Colleen Slevin, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
Insurer Aflac discloses cybersecurity incident
Insurer Aflac said on Friday it identified suspicious activity on its network in the United States on June 12. The company said it has reached out to third-party cybersecurity experts to investigate the incident and has commenced a review of potentially impacted files. These files contain personal information of its customers, including social security numbers and health-related details, it added. Shares of Aflac fell 1.6 per cent in premarket trading. (Reporting by Christy Santhosh in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber)
CBC
3 hours ago
- CBC
Trump can keep National Guard in L.A. through legal challenges, appeals court rules
A U.S. appeals court let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles. Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on U.S. soil and inflamed political tension in the country's second-most-populous city. On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former president Joe Biden. Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding that his administration probably complied with the requirement to co-ordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Trump's directive. "And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage," it wrote in its opinion. Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social as a win and said, "If our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done." WATCH l Trump says urgent action required in several cases: Protests, tariffs, borders: Why Trump says everything is an emergency | About That 8 days ago Duration 12:03 Description: U.S. President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in California with a rarely used law invoked when the government believes a rebellion is underway. Andrew Chang breaks down how Trump's framing of these protests as an emergency — along with everything from trade deficits to fentanyl — exists as part of a larger pattern of governing by executive order with unchecked power. California to continue legal challenges, Newsom says Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and U.S. Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. "The president is not a king and is not above the law," said Newsom on X. "We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against our citizens." Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Newsom's wishes. The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Mayor Karen Bass earlier this week to lift a curfew she had imposed. Appeals court cites property damage At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities' vehicles, used trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalized property, frustrating law enforcement. The Justice Department has said once the president determines that an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument. In its June 9 lawsuit, California said Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and U.S. laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.
CTV News
5 hours ago
- CTV News
CTV National News: How a missing Montreal toddler ended up in rural Ontario
Watch Police believe the missing three-year-old girl didn't move from the spot she was eventually found in for days. Denise Roberts has the details.
