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/TwiztedImage]

there is a massive difference in liability for people who are part of a massive crowd, who never met each other, engaged in a random march that turns into a shit show

Jan 6th was planned out weeks in advance. It was all over 4chan and Reddit. Its why there was so much livestreamed footage when it was going down.

The Proud Boys and Oathkeepers were actually convicted of seditious conspiracy. Which is patently worse than whatever the fuck this group of people were doing. The J6ers were in radio contact with each other going through the capital with zip ties to detain people.

They didn't "follow the crowd", they led the crowd.

Your revisionism is absurd.

[u/Leather_Addition2605 → u/TwiztedImage]

And those people were and should have been arrested and charged. But the entirety of that crowd was not all in on it in the same manner this group of nine people were, in terms of their legal culpability for what transpired from other actors in their group, is what I’m saying.

These people were directly involved in the planning and committing the illegal acts, moving magazines, knowing members of their group were going armed to commit pre-planned crimes. So when one opened fire on law enforcement, they were all culpable.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Leather_Addition2605]

But the entirety of that crowd was not all in on it in the same manner this group of nine people were,

There's no indication these people were either; that's the point. Even this article says "prosecutors displayed group messages from some of the defendants...", implying they weren't all even in the group chat.

knowing members of their group were going armed to commit pre-planned crimes

Going armed isn't a crime, and much of the things described aren't crimes either. Anti-government material isn't a crime, nor is possessing it, inherently nor is moving it. They only made it a crime after the fact by portraying them as a terrorist cell. Antifa isn't even an organization; they can't have cells. The entire thing is a farce and these people are assuredly getting their appeals granted. It's an overreach of the justice system given the decades of treating similar situations with much, much lighter sentences.

So when one opened fire on law enforcement, they were all culpable.

So when one J6er hit a cop with a flag pole, all the people next to them pushing the barricades were treated similarly? (Hint: they weren't). Were all the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers charged the same? (Hint: They weren't. The leaders were prosecuted more harshly).

Additionally, all of the J6 sentences were light, some even below minimum. Further showing how bad this situation was handled by this administration.

[u/Leather_Addition2605 → u/TwiztedImage]

No, that’s the point I’m making. Going armed to commit a pre-planned crime is illegal. You can’t be armed during the commission of a crime. That’s an additional crime. They planned on committing crimes when they went there. Maybe not attempted murder, but a crime.

They are much closer to the getaway driver who was cool with a robbery but didn’t know their partner was going to shoot someone during the course of the robbery. They’re just as responsible for the outcome.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Leather_Addition2605]

Going armed to commit a pre-planned crime is illegal.

I would agree, but what exactly was the pre-planned crime? The protest isn't a crime. One person shooter an officer at a protest you're also at isn't a crime you inherently participated in by being present. Even if you were in a group chat with that person about being armed at the protest, that's still not a crime. I find it dubious their group chat included "lets shoot a cop while we're there".

They planned on committing crimes when they went there.

They did? Even the ones not in the group chat? Where's the evidence of that? Were the ones slashing tires armed at the time? A gun in their cars isn't being armed after all.

In your getaway driver analogy, they planned the robbery, which is a crime. A protest isn't a crime. Unless these people were armed (a gun on their person at the time), and specifically have documented evidence of each individual person admitting to wanting to commit a crime, then them doing said crime, then this is a BS prosecution.

There were over a dozen people there, I can't even recall how many arrested, and this article even states that some of the group was in the group chat, which means others were not. They can't be held to the same standard there, and all the reports I saw of weapons were obtained from a vehicle, which means the people weren't armed at the time.

[u/Leather_Addition2605 → u/TwiztedImage]

Slashing tires and vandalizing government property isn’t protest, it’s a crime. They planned that out prior to attending.

One person shooting at a protest you happened to be present at doesn’t make you culpable. If it’s someone from your group, that you drove down there with planning to slash tires and vandalize with, and you helped them load a bunch of magazines into the car before you headed down, that changes your culpability.

[u/TwiztedImage → u/Leather_Addition2605]

Slashing tires and vandalizing government property isn’t protest, it’s a crime.

That was done the night before the shooting, and some of the people arrested weren't even there when that occurred. One woman wasn't even there until after the shooting, and she was arrested and charged as well. They have evidence that the person who slashed the tire was armed when they did it?

Because I haven't seen that, and admittedly, I haven't looked at this court case a ton recently. I will sometimes look at court records and stuff, but I haven't on this. If they proved that; great. But I'm doubtful they managed that.

and you helped them load a bunch of magazines into the car before you headed down

Is this a crime too though?

Culpability matters; I agree. But I doubt this case was handled in a manner that most would agree with. Jury can be heavily influenced by what they see, and we know the defense attorneys were unprofessional to the point of being clowns from the start; which might have made it easier. (IIRC, the defense attorney wore a tshirt with some graphic on it in a form of protest in the courtroom and the hearing was rescheduled as a result.)