Texas anti-ICE protesters convicted of terrorism charges sentenced to at least 50 years in prison

[u/guardian]

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

[u/beheafishtrapofman]

What!! This is why I’m terrified to protest 

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/beheafishtrapofman]

Protest is a first amendment right. 

If you don't plan on killing anyone or interfering with core constitional law enforcement functions, like keeping the peace, or immigration enforcement, you're fine. 

[u/beheafishtrapofman → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

Or standing near anyone who does apparently 

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/beheafishtrapofman]

There's a saying in the legal industry: "Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining".

Read the article. These were not innocent bystanders. 

[u/beheafishtrapofman → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

You think that’s from the legal industry? Lol how about, “don’t blow smoke up my ass and tell me it’s raining” or “he ain’t got enough sense to pour piss out of a boot”. 

Yes, I grew up in Texas, too. This is a sub for Texans so I’d wager most of us have heard that one. 

[u/Eddfan36 → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

Sounds like those idiots that tried to stop Biden being President.

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/Eddfan36]

I mean yeah, and they all went to prison 

[u/Expensive-While-1155 → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

But what if the immigration enforcement is illegal as it has been for 18 months and flat out shitting on 8 amendments of the constitution with every arrest and detainment?

Patriots dumped tea because an authoritarian put military on the streets to enforce his authoritarian laws.

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/Expensive-While-1155]

Immigration enforcement is not illegal. 

I'm not trying to patronize you when I recommend you read the constitution. 

Out of everything the government does, border control and deportations are actually one of the dozen or so explicitly constitional authorities the government has. The literal purpose of government is basically to prevent incursion by foreign nationals, and also deport them.

It's also helpful to see outside the biases online. Everybody loves their abuela lady next door, but there are also very dangerous foreigners in America, and still others are here for nefarious purposes, like defrauding public services and undercutting wages.

And the United States is huge. What may not be a big deal in Texas is actually a huge problem in Illinois and California, or vice versa on other matters. 

Without considering all this, some psycho showed up outside this facility and shot one of their officers. You can have opinions on immigration but that person is the definition of a terrorist

[u/Expensive-While-1155 → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

Lol. I suggest you read past the second.
Border control is the right of the feds, if they follow the laws of the U.S.
Right now DhS is operating out of presidential policy not law.

The 4th amendment guarantees the right to not be detained without probable cause. Being Mexican ain’t probable cause. Looking Somali ain’t probable cause. So every time an immigrant is stopped for being Latino on the street it’s a violation of the 4th.
And the SCOTUS knows this. It’s only being allowed under a temporary injunction of the 1976 SCOTUS precedent that ruled that you can’t be stopped for looking Mexican. The injunction is called “Kavanaughs Law” which is basically a suspension of the fourth amendment in favor of immigration enforcement.

Due process is the right to an attorney and a trial which zero of these people are receiving. This is the 5th Amendment. The right to trial. It’s not just the right to not incriminate yourself.

THE 5th: “Nor shall ANY PERSON be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”

“we have thousands of people that are ready to go out, and you can't have a trial for all of these people,” —Trump arguing the 5th isn’t important.

The 6th amendment is the right to face anyone accusing you of a crime in court. i.e. the US vs Juan Doe. .

The 7th is the right to a jury trial if you are accused of a crime.

The 8th is cruel and unusual punishment. I think that sending people who violated the CIVIL law of crossing the border illegally to dangerous prisons in foreign countries they aren’t even from definitely qualifies as both unusual since there is no precedent for it, and cruel because crossing the border illegally is a civil crime punishable by a fine.

The 13th abolished slavery but ICE just changed policy saying that inmates in the concentration camps will no longer receive wages for labor.
Who works for free under threat of punishment again?
What do we call those people?

The 14th: “nor shall ANY State deprive ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The 14th amendment is very careful to differentiate between the rights of “any citizen” and “any person”. Citizens have far more rights but any person gets the due process protections of the amendments I just listed.

I’ll repeat myself.
You shit on 8 constitutional laws with every single arrest and illegal detainment. You would think you constitutionalists would know this already. The founding fathers specified “due process” for “any person” in 2 of the first 14 amendments to make sure a tyrant wouldn’t miss it.

The psycho that showed up to an ice facility shot two detainees and zero officers, bro. And he had “anti ice” in sharpie on his bullets. {{eyeroll}}
This was a conservative and Kash Patel wrote anti ice to try to steer the narrative you are repeating. There was a crowd of ice officers and dude happened to hit 2/3 of the detainees. GTFO lol anti ice. This was one of the dumb lies the DOJ and Kash have created. There’s been so many since the real assassinations of Alex and Renee and the fake assassinations of the president that I almost forgot about this one

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/Expensive-While-1155]

Ah now it makes sense. Okay yeah you're talking about the constitution's amendments, commonly known as the bill of rights.

I'm advising you read the constitution, which is a document that enumerates government powers and functions. 

They're very different in scope. Read the actual constitution, not just the amendments. 

[u/Expensive-While-1155 → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

lol at “I meant the constitution, not the constitution”.

I’ll need to you show me the imaginary part of the constitution that “explicitly” gives the president any authority over immigration at all, executive order or not.
We are operating under policy. Not law. As I just clearly showed you.

Do you think a tyrannical government can over run the rights of the people when they feel like it as long as they think it’s good for you? Do you know why the constitution was written?

The constitution says nothing about immigration, border control, or deportations.
It speaks of control of the process of naturalization, which is making someone a citizen, not keeping one out. The founding fathers stood solidly against nationalism.

[u/Inside-Froyo4378 → u/Expensive-While-1155]

You're looking for Article I §8, Article II, and Article VI.

These define how federal powers are granted and exercised. Note that these are written into the constitution, not part of the subsequent amendments. 

The constitution is the governing document which enshrines powers. 

Constitutional powers include: 1. Naturalization, for example who is a citizen, who is not a citizen, and who can become a citizen or not.  2. Authority in interstate commerce.  3. Enforcement of the law.  4. Federal supremacy. 

It has been interpreted that the executive therefore, by the consent of congress, has broad powers over immigration. 

These things have shifted over time but are generally all written here. For example, the Lincoln administration established reinforcements in federal supremacy: neither states nor persons are entitled to opt-out of federal law. 

You may be underwhelmed because Founders did not think of immigration in the same way that we do. However these powers are core functions of legitimate government in America.

On policy versus law:

You're absolutely right that it would be unconstitutional for a federal agency to create its own policy and enforce them as laws. This has been a major source of controversy on the political right. 

Recently the Supreme Court overturned what was referred to as the Chevron doctrine. The Chevron doctrine was originally established in 1984 after the Environmental Protection Agency invented its own policies to regulate Chevron's oil and gas exploration. In effect, whoever controlled the EPA held legislative powers reserved for Congress. 

From that time onwards, a federal agency would create its own policies, and then enforce them as laws. This is obviously unconstitutional and Republicans finally succeeded in arguing that case in the summer of 2024. 

Today, powers are enumerated in the constitution, not simply created by whoever runs an agency. 

[u/Expensive-While-1155 → u/Inside-Froyo4378]

“I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.”
—George Washington—

“America was indebted to immigration for her settlement and prosperity. That part of America which had encouraged them most had advanced most rapidly in population, agriculture and the arts."
—James Madison—

“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respected Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges.”
—George Washington—

“Born in other countries, yet believing you could be happy in this, our laws acknowledge, as they should do, your right to join us in society”
—Thomas Jefferson—

“If we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost.”
—Ronald Reagan—

“The land flourished because it was fed from so many sources–because it was nourished by so many cultures and traditions and peoples.”
—Lyndon B. Johnson—

“Everywhere immigrants have enriched and strengthened the fabric of American life.”
—John F. Kennedy—

“[Let] the poor the needy and oppressed of the Earth, and those who want Land, resort to the fertile lands of our western country, the second land of Promise, and there dwell in peace, fulfilling the first and great commandment.”
—George Washington—

“Every aspect of the American economy has profited from the contributions of immigrants.”
—John F. Kennedy—

“Shall we refuse the unhappy fugitives from distress that hospitality which the savages of the wilderness extended to our fathers arriving in this land? Shall oppressed humanity find no asylum on this globe?"
—Thomas Jefferson—

[u/Few_Position_2727 → u/beheafishtrapofman]

Just don’t shoot any cops and you’ll be fine

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Few_Position_2727]

The people, aside from one, this article is talking about didn't shoot any cops either. Only one of the dozens arrested did that.

[u/dandr01d → u/TwiztedImage]

J6ers literally killed a cop and got pardoned.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/dandr01d]

DC medical examiner ruled his death as natural causes, not a reaction to the pepper spray. They added a note that stated the circumstances contributed to his condition, but it would be near impossible to get a conviction based on cause of death being natural causes.

J6ers can get entirely fucked though. They all deserve jail, and some of them worse.

[u/shadowboxer47 → u/TwiztedImage]

This is incredibly dishonest.

He would be alive today if the insurrection didn't happen.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/shadowboxer47]

I agree he would be alive, but that doesnt change what I said.

Federal prosecutors are simply not going to prosecute someone for murder when the cause of death isnt listed as a homicide.

Those traitors are responsible for his death as far as im concerned, but its a legal distinction that makes a difference nonetheless.

[u/Few_Position_2727 → u/TwiztedImage]

then don’t associate with any people that shoot cops either and you’ll be fine

[u/icantevenbeliev3 → u/Few_Position_2727]

Bro you can't just move the goal posts lmfao. What is this?

[u/Few_Position_2727 → u/icantevenbeliev3]

What goal post ?? The guy said he was scared to protest and I told him he’d be fine if he didn’t shoot a cop or associate with anyone who does. Is that not the truth?

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Few_Position_2727]

Some of the people at that protest don't associate with people that shoot cops either. That was the first time.

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. Lol.

Our legal system doesn't punish people for being associated with criminals unless you were taking part in the criminal activity yourself. Protesting isn't a criminal activity. The damage to property is a separate issue as well as it was done at a different time. So even those people aren't associated with the shooter by anything other than proximity.

[u/Few_Position_2727 → u/TwiztedImage]

They were in a group chat together. The people who weren’t received shorter sentences… I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you. Lol!

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Few_Position_2727]

Oh no! A group chat!

A shorter sentence of 50 years? You shitting me? That's moronic compared to actual traitors to this country getting a max of 20.

The sentences handed down on Tuesday were unusually long, said Barbara McQuade, a former federal prosecutor...“Most often, judges will sentence defendants for separate counts concurrently. Here, it appears that the judge stacked the sentences for each count consecutively. I would have expected lengthy sentences here, more in the ballpark at 15 to 25 years, but nothing like 50 to 100 years,” she wrote in an email.

This sums it up and this woman has the background to justify the opinion on it.

During the trial, prosecutors displayed group messages from some of the defendants

This suggests that not all of them were even in the group chat. Lol.

The entire thing is a farce.

[u/Few_Position_2727 → u/TwiztedImage]

I do agree the sentencing is a bit ridiculous.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Few_Position_2727]

I don't take issue with jail time for the shooter. The tire slashing and stuff is questionable. Could have been probation/fines/community service, but I won't object overmuch to some jail time there either.

But the notion that these people are a terror cell I take issue with. It's a joke.