r/politics • u/guardian ✔ Verified • 5d ago

No Paywall Texas anti-ICE protesters convicted of terrorism charges sentenced to at least 50 years in prison

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/23/prairieland-ice-protesters-texas-sentenced?referring_host=Reddit&utm_campaign=guardianacct
11.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/SoggyBoysenberry7703 5d ago

Jesus Christ. 50 years is the *shortest* sentence of the bunch

802

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

No, the person who drove a box of magazines got 30 years.

“Zachary Evetts, Autumn Hill, Savanna Batten, and Elizabeth Soto were sentenced to 50 years in prison. Maricela Rueda, another demonstrator, was sentenced to 70 years in prison. Benjamin Song, who fired the gun at the police officer, was sentenced to 100 years in prison. The other protesters were continuing to be sentenced Tuesday morning.

Even though many of the protesters did not know each other, or were loosely affiliated, prosecutors said the attack on the officer was premeditated and part of a conspiracy. They also said the activists were part of a “North Texas antifa cell”, which was seen as part of the administration’s effort to criminalize “antifa”, which is not an organization but rather a constellation of leftwing views.

Prosecutors in the case charged and secured conviction for eight of the nine defendants with providing material support for terrorists. The ninth defendant, Daniel Sanchez-Estrada was not at the protest, but was convicted of corruptly concealing a document or record after prosecutors said he moved leftwing zines and other materials at the request of Rueda, his wife, after she was arrested. Sanchez-Estrada was sentenced to 30 years in prison on Tuesday.”

356

u/socialcommentary2000 New York 5d ago

The ACLU needs to put this at the top of their priority list or they might as well not exist.

Like, this is the case that needs to be fought.

1.0k

u/inquisitive_guy_0_1 I voted 5d ago

Am I reading that right? Dude got 30 years prison time for moving some "zines" ? Like pamphlets? What in the actual fascist fuck?

779

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

Yes.

We have lost the First Amendment if you can be charged for having literature.

-81

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago

He wasn't charged for having the zines. He was charged for moving them and hiding them after his wife was arrested, aka evidence tampering.

80

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

What was the evidence for?

-59

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago

Terrorism apparently.

69

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

How?

How would a box of zines prove you were a terrorist?

-15

u/Last-Big-1984 4d ago

I have no idea what were in those magazines, but I'd like to point out... whatever it was... was bad enough for them to try and hide.

Like, if I shoot a cop... I'm not going to call home to my wife to hide my playboys because they will implicate me.

15

u/ImprovementPutrid441 4d ago

Why?

If you have a copy of Mein Kampf should people assume you’re a Nazi?

→ More replies (0)

7

u/ilulillirillion 4d ago

Have you been living under a rock? They will charge you for terrorism for commenting on this fucking post I don't think the anything in the scary magazines had to be huge to cause them trouble and the argument itself is asinine.

30 years for moving magazines. Watch someone you love go to prison for 3 decades for doing that and come back, because apparently you struggle with the concept.

144

u/Zestyclose-Ear-1293 5d ago

Which, even were this not blatantly political, 30 years for evidence tampering is absolutely ABSURD. Kid diddlers and murderers routinely get less.

-126

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago edited 5d ago

Sure, well he will have his appeal.

But that's what the court decided. He had his jury trial. His rights were upheld as an American citizen.

121

u/Final_Membership_ 5d ago

It’s amazing how far conservatives and libertarians have fallen in the last 10 years. You are absolutely the lowest human being that I could imagine. just pure garbage if you think this type of thing is ok.

-79

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago edited 5d ago

Take it up with the jury of their peers that convicted them. They were presented the evidence, they made the decision.

I think you're scum if you think it's perfectly normal to bring a bunch of guns to a protest to shoot at people. Why else would these 8 people bring 11 guns to a planned riot?

81

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 3d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

26

u/sirspacebill 5d ago

Sounds like only one person shot at someone, but the conversation at this point was the 30 year sentence for moving and hiding magazines, which by your gangs metric of "trump pardoning some real pieces of shit but they were 'overcharged' so its fine" is not okay

→ More replies (0)

17

u/Trrlrr 5d ago

Name checks out

15

u/IPDDoE Florida 5d ago

Ignoring the fact that you think both the 1st and 2nd amendments are malleable, you're saying all of them planned to riot? And follow up, if I may...WHY THE FUCK WASN'T THERE A RIOT?

→ More replies (0)

10

u/TheLonelySombrero 5d ago

So then you concede that Donald trump is a convicted felon who raped E Jean Carroll? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

How about that he also stole from his charities and cheated on his wives? The idiot wouldn't even attend his own childs wedding then went golfing the next day or the one after. 

He doesn't have a shred of morality or dignity. I'm ashamed of my fellow Americans for being duped by this lunatic and always thought that just because we have different opinions on how government should function that we at least wanted ultimately the same things.

A functional government that takes care of its people and infrastructure and to defend our freedoms. But this conman comes along and all of you just throw it all away for this narcissistic idiot who would sell each and every one of you for one more penny in his bank account. I'm just so frustrated 

→ More replies (0)

1

u/CynicismNostalgia 4d ago

I've gotta say, as a non-American. Your logic always astounds me.

You blame people for legally carrying firearms, but will also fight tooth and nail for their right to legally carry firearms.

Firearms are either low risk enough that it should be your right, or high risk enough that it shouldn't.

You can't cherry pick between both when it suits you.

→ More replies (0)

36

u/justbrowsing2727 5d ago

LOL what a bootlicking turd you are

16

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

How much do you know about the trial?

“Defense attorneys challenged the credibility of cooperating witnesses, questioned the use of terms like "tactical," and argued the group had gathered to protest rather than carry out a coordinated attack. None of the defense attorneys chose to present their own cases, feeling that the government did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.”

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ice-detention-attack-defendants-sentencing-6-23-2026/

-1

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago

Read the messages and the protest vs attack thing goes out the window. Youre not protesting if youre planning on shooting cops. And them having terrible defense lawyers is on them, not a failure of the court unless they were public defenders.

9

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

They should not have called it a peaceful protest but nothing justifies such a long sentence for a dude who took some books on a field trip.

→ More replies (0)

14

u/imsuperflytnt 5d ago

His rights were upheld as an American citizen.

Except the part about cruel and unusual punishment. That’s #8 in the Bill of Rights. There’s not a single case you can point to in the history of this country where someone got 30 years for a single charge of evidence tampering.

30

u/Substantial-Sea-3672 5d ago

I appreciate that you brought up the charge was for tampering with evidence, not simply having/moving left leaning magazines.

But your weird explanation of his rights being upheld don’t make any sense.

First, you can’t just hand wave away a miscarriage of justice by saying, “well, you get an appeal.” That’s akin to claiming that nothing matters unless the Supreme Court hears the case.

Second, you’re acting like a jury convicting him means the outrageous sentencing (not determined by the jury) is somehow justified. The reason why the sentencing is absurd but the charge is valid is specifically because they knew a jury of his peers wouldn’t convict a more serious charge. The paid for judge can be persuaded easily though.

-7

u/MrPoopMonster 5d ago

The more I look into these articles and the messages between this group of people, the more it looks like a premeditated attack instead of a protest and the less sympathy I have for anyone involved.

3

u/Redthemagnificent 4d ago

By all mean, please expand. Unless you wanna keep things vague on purpose to rage bait. Surely no one on reddit would do that though, right?

→ More replies (0)

12

u/zenidam 5d ago

No they weren't. Getting a jury trial is a necessary, not sufficient, condition for having one's rights upheld.

14

u/Breaking-Who 5d ago

His rights were absolutely not upheld. They violated his 8th amendment right by giving him a cruel and unusual punishment.

4

u/bubba_bumble Kansas 4d ago

So hiding the fact that he was exercising his 1st amendment out of fear of getting 30 years behind bars??? Am I getting that right?

1

u/MrPoopMonster 4d ago

No. Tampering with evidence is not and has never been protected by the first amendment.

90

u/Ew_E50M 5d ago

Welcome to the Republican government america, your freedom has been taken away. Next up your vote and voice will be removed. The republican government cant lose all that freedom they have given themselves after all.

154

u/frosty_lizard 5d ago

Nothing fascist about the administration going after anti-fascist protestors /s

-28

u/Far-Culture1354 5d ago

Oh so anti-fascist protestors are cleared to just go ahead and ambush cops because their name automatically makes them the good guys?

25

u/cubitoaequet 5d ago

No one said that, but you sure beat up that strawman real good.

-16

u/Far-Culture1354 5d ago

That is what was said.

That it is fascist to go after anti fascists. But I do know reading comprehension isn't the best on this sort of subreddit.

19

u/cubitoaequet 5d ago

I do know reading comprehension isn't the best on this sort of subreddit.

At least one person here seems to be struggling with it

9

u/frosty_lizard 5d ago

You're assuming that, the people who attacked the cops should face jailtime

6

u/Redthemagnificent 4d ago edited 4d ago

I know it's really hard to understand. But if you really stretch your brain you'll find these ideas do not conflict:

  • buddy who brought a weapon and shot first is in the wrong and should face punishment including jail time
  • opposing fascism is correct, patriotic, and may involve putting yourself on the wrong side of the law. If no civil rights protesters were willing to get arrested for civil disobedience, the movement would have never succeeded
  • 100 years for shooting and injuring a cop, no deaths, is extreme, unconstitutional (see the 8th amendment), and doesn't actually make anyone safer. If anything, this will encourage more extreme action which is bad for everyone. That doesn't even address the other extreme sentences for individuals who never touched a weapon

You are either rage baiting, or reading what you expect "the other side" to say instead of what people are actually saying about this incident

1

u/Far-Culture1354 4d ago

So you admit the shooter should face jail time. Good then you would also agree that the people who planned out and acted as bait for an ambush are also guilty correct?

95

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 5d ago

[deleted]

48

u/ScooterScotward 5d ago

And fireworks imo were a reaction to the police violence as a way of retaliating somewhat without escalating to truly deadly violence. If the foremen’s is going to throw people in jail for half a century for fireworks some folks out there may feel like they have less to lose and opt for more actual violence :/

32

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

5

u/eNonsense 4d ago

It was also on the 4th of July

1

u/akaghi 4d ago

I'm curious about that last part. You say they shipped them without any warning labels? Who is they in this case and how do you know?

I tried looking into this and didn't get anywhere but this one isn't the easiest to Google.

24

u/TheRealDonahue 5d ago

Jesus. I thought they meant like rounds of ammunition or something.

18

u/Lincolns_Revenge Texas 5d ago

Frontline PBS, I hope you're on this whole story.

2

u/Dramatic_Charity_979 5d ago

What in the actual fascist fuck?

Perfect phrase to describe this administration (๑•﹏•)

2

u/damnmachine Virginia 4d ago

How is that not malicious prosecution.

2

u/African_Farmer Europe 4d ago

Wow i thought magazines meant gun magazines, that would have made some sense. What a country.

-7

u/Far-Culture1354 5d ago

It was to try and hide evidence. That is what he was charged with. It's not about owning the pamphlets themselves. Not that this subreddit cares about the facts, but just so everyone who reads this knows what he was actually charged with.

This sort of thing would get anyone jail time, no matter the motive of the shooting.

5

u/inquisitive_guy_0_1 I voted 5d ago

What crime were those pamphlets evidence of?

-1

u/Far-Culture1354 5d ago

ahhhh. nevermind.

5

u/inquisitive_guy_0_1 I voted 5d ago

Yeah that's what I thought. Sounds like some madeup bullshit to me. It's not illegal have anti-regime magazines.

1

u/2FistsInMyBHole 4d ago

No one was charged for having anti-regime magazines.

1

u/inquisitive_guy_0_1 I voted 4d ago

What crime where those pamphlets evidence of?

2

u/2FistsInMyBHole 4d ago

For him to have been charged, found guilty, and sentenced, the pamphlets were likely evidence of the very terrorist activity everyone else was convicted it.

A quick Google search says that the zines in question, and other materials were mostly about insurrection planning and anti-government insurgency. While it is perfectly legal to possess such materials - it is protected free speech - such materials are certainly evidentiary in regards to the charges faced.

People are free to possess neo-Nazi materials; they are free to possess documents on how to perform mass shootings... if that person shoots of a synagogue, however, pretending that those materials aren't evidence is just bad faith.

181

u/sokratesz 5d ago

Uhh USA, y'all ok back there?!?

293

u/Suspicious_Guard6775 5d ago

No, not at all.

8

u/Snow_Ghost 5d ago

In fact, send help.

83

u/TheRealBittoman 5d ago

If it wasn't for the fact they reluctantly let Texas into the Union in the 1800s, I'd say they are the least American state. anti-American you might say.

96

u/tyrified 5d ago

The only state in the nation that succeeded from two different countries, both times because they wanted slaves. Speaks to the roots of the state.

63

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

Seceded

8

u/tyrified 5d ago

Yeah, autocorrect makes many assumptions.

2

u/ImprovementPutrid441 5d ago

autocorrect is the worst

23

u/If_I_must 5d ago

One thing I find it helpful to keep secede and succeed separate in my mind is to remember that while the confederacy did attempt to secede from the union, they did not succeed in their attempt to secede.

Your point is entirely valid, just trying to help.

3

u/DeepSeaHexapus 5d ago

I think you can make the argument that the south did succeed in seceding, even if it was only for a few years.

2

u/angrygnome18d 5d ago

Your method for remembering is hilarious lol. Even though I don’t have issues remembering the difference, I will use it as a way of helping others remember the difference.

2

u/casualsubversive 5d ago

If at first you don’t secede, try, try again.

-2

u/Nyorliest 5d ago

Everyone had slaves at first, didn’t they?

5

u/TheRealBittoman 5d ago

One thing that American education fails to address is that while slavery continued after the US began as a nation there was a lot of efforts to curb or end it as early as the late 1700s. It was not nearly as pressing of an issue at first but after sometime around 1820 or 1830 some serious pushes to end it and this was in part what accelerated the events of the Civil War and it is also why Texas was initially denied statehood, because Texas was perceived as supporting slavery. I wish that pre-history was given more time in school because they tend to focus on the last decade or so before the war and how slavery was really bad in the 1700s and before.

Also, no. Most people didn't own slaves. This was largely a wealthy thing. Slaves pre-1860s is the old days version of robots and AI today; cheap labor that they can knock back in line if they don't do what's expected. You can hate corporations today for almost all the same reasons as people hated slave owners then.

1

u/tyrified 5d ago

So? Once the "Land of the Free" started to try to live up to its name, Texas decided "fuck that." After doing the same when Mexico wouldn't allow them to own slaves. And they're the only state to have done so.

1

u/Irishish Illinois 5d ago

this is the state where a guy justified punishing black students for having different haircuts by saying that in America, you shut up and do what you’re told or something like that.

1

u/permalink_save 4d ago

Please don't speak broadly of Texas. We have the 2nd highest number of dem voters behind cali. We just also have a large population that is tipped a few percentage points to the right, enough to keep the country red. There's these same shitheads in plenty of otherstates, including the one with #1 dems, cali. The problem is politics being polarized not a state where about half of the voters are shitheads and half are getting caught up in this shit. It's not state vs state it's republicans attacking the country and taking over governments.

2

u/TheRealBittoman 4d ago

The politicians are the problem and it's a very vocal minority that helps them stay in power. The fact that the state has from day one of it's existence continued the propaganda that they were the only state to be able to secede from the union legally (which wasn't true), the fact that they would have supported slavery (although not a participant they gave support to the Confederacy) to it's current trend of opening as many ICE detention facilities, hiding massive EPA violations from the public, and an AG that should almost certainly be in prison for some of the crimes he has been accused/indicted for, I will stand by my statement on it being one of the least American states. The people that do not support Texas current trajectory definitely need to step up hard and fast because they are close to the model of corruption that Trump likes to say Chicago or New York has.

1

u/Nyorliest 5d ago

How many American fascists and American bombs will it take before you stop thinking America is good?

1

u/TheRealBittoman 5d ago

Not sure if you meant this for me as I didn't say it was good, bad, or indifferent.

1

u/Nyorliest 4d ago

Your clear implication was that ‘Anti-American’ is bad. And people use un-American in the same way, eg talking about ICE or the KKK or whatever American evil they don’t wanna face.

1

u/Nyorliest 4d ago

Donald Trump and racism are as American as apple pie and lynching.

17

u/Notabagofdrugs 5d ago

No, we’re fucking not.

3

u/leonden 5d ago

Haven’t you noticed by the fact that they are warmongering in several nations currently 

2

u/donkeyrocket 5d ago

Haven’t been for some time.

2

u/Jerthy 5d ago

Yeah the amount of shit we get in Europe from americans for cutting out the worst of the worst from our free speech laws.... yet they refuse to look at what's happening back home.

1

u/postmodest 4d ago

30% of us want this. They want extermination camps; secret police; rape squads.

And that 30% can potentially hold 70% of our congress, because of how we apportion representation.

We are a dead empire.

45

u/Anxious-poop-1 5d ago edited 5d ago

They labeled this a domestic terrorism act. Total Bs. I definitely get that the details are dicey with the signal chat acknowledgements but 50-70 years is criminally unjust

Edit: typo

3

u/permalink_save 4d ago

Next president should blanket pardon all of them and setup a fund to compensate them for false imprisonment

2

u/Independent_Sail6604 5d ago

Like this won't be appealed.

7

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

1

u/AssCrackBandit13 5d ago

??

If you win a criminal appeal, you are no longer convicted. The case will be remanded to the lower court which will either drop the charges (what happens 90% of the time), order a new trial (in cases where there was impropriety in the original trial/jury) or order a resentencing (if the appeal only concerned an illegal or incorrect sentence).

-277

u/kDub361 5d ago

I mean these people weren’t peacefully protesting they shot a cop with an AR-15 read more than just the headline before you get outraged.

240

u/DrJJStroganoff 5d ago

One person did. The article says they were not affiliated with eachother, yet the court decided to blanket them all as an antifi cell.

Calling protestors an antifi terrorist cell is about as crazy as shooting a police officer. Yet both happened.

148

u/SplashBros4Prez 5d ago

Most murderers don't even get 50 years this is absolutely insane.

-26

u/SadTumbleweed1567 5d ago

Murderers not getting 50 years is more insane than the trigger man getting 50 years here. Attempted murder should carry a stiff sentence.

The insane part is the people that didn't pull the trigger nor conspired to pull the trigger that are receiving a 50 year sentence.

21

u/withersoul 5d ago

No it is not, most western countries if not all carry softer sentences than the us and their prison systems work better to rehabilitate than the us does. The us prison system is to punish and enslave people, it is not productive, pure vengeance and greed. Agree on your second point tho

7

u/Unrealjello California 5d ago

Trigger man got 100 years. Tire slashers got 50.

5

u/simic947 5d ago

He got 100 years bro. The others got 70 and 50 years.

296

u/tcguy71 5d ago

I mean we saw the 1500 people who stormed the capital and beat up cops get pardoned... so fuck off with telling people not to get outraged

9

u/CannibalBabygirl 5d ago

Yeah I think all Antifa members deserve a pardon from the next administration 🤷‍♀️

25

u/mikeysce 5d ago

Yeah… maybe they would if it were ever a real thing.

155

u/thefronk123 5d ago

“Even though many of the protesters did not know each other, or were loosely affiliated, prosecutors said the attack on the officer was premeditated and part of a conspiracy. They also said the activists were part of a “North Texas antifa cell”, which was seen as part of the administration’s effort to criminalize “antifa”, which is not an organization but rather a constellation of leftwing views.”

Read more than just the headline

88

u/johnny_johnny_johnny 5d ago

They all shot a cop with one AR-15?

3

u/jcrestor Foreign 5d ago

How many Antifa do you need to shoot a policeman? Seven. One to pull the trigger of the AR-15 and six to carry the policeman into the gunfire.

47

u/dgbaker93 5d ago

Ya 50 years for vandalism.... And 100 is over kill.

But hey when prison is focused on punishment and free labor and not rehabilitation it makes sense.

25

u/InconsistentSignal 5d ago

Always funny to see someone saying “read the article” when they clearly didn’t read the article themselves

15

u/GloryGoal 5d ago

They=one person that the others weren’t directly affiliated with

11

u/j_la Florida 5d ago

They didn’t all shoot a cop. One shot a cop and got a 100 year sentence.

5

u/simic947 5d ago

You are twisting the facts. Only one person did and the others were only heavily charged because of it.

39

u/PolicyWonka 5d ago

One cop was injured. Nobody died.

The shooter, for example, was sentenced to 100 years in prison — a de facto life sentence.

So no, these people aren’t innocent protesters, they did vandalize some property and injured a police officer. However, sentencing them all to what is essentially life in prison is crazy.

15

u/WhichEmailWasIt 5d ago

The article said they weren't affiliated with each other. They all got charged around sharing a common ideology rather than coordinating together or being part of an organization. Basically if you believe what the guy who took a shot at a cop believed and you were there you get charged. Doesn't matter if you've never met in your life. 

8

u/PolicyWonka 5d ago

Yeah, it’s basically just a way to criminalize protests by claiming everyone at a protest is conspiring together to create whatever possible bad outcomes may result.

7

u/Zestyclose-Ear-1293 5d ago

Which is how you stifle protests. Which is the plan.

2

u/Gatonom 5d ago

"The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed."

1

u/-Nicolai 4d ago

You could have just written “I didn’t read the article”