FORT WORTH, TEXAS<\/em> \u2014 Daniel Sanchez Estrada<\/span> wasn\u2019t accused of attempted murder or material support of terrorism after a protest turned catastrophically wrong outside an ICE detention center in Alvarado, Texas. He was merely convicted of obstructing the investigation by moving a box full of antifascist zines<\/a> after the protest. Giving him a long prison term would make a mockery of justice, his defense attorney, Christopher Weinbel, told U.S. District Judge Reed O\u2019Connor on Tuesday.<\/p>\n \u201cThe punishment must fit the crimes \u2014 not the headlines, not the politics, not the fears that have been mongered about the case,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Instead, O\u2019Connor gave Sanchez Estrada a 30-year term. <\/p>\n The lengthy sentence was among the eight harsh terms handed down by judges in two courtrooms in Fort Worth on Tuesday to activists who played roles at or after the July 4, 2025, protest at Prairieland Detention Center. Their sentences \u2014\u00a0longer than any of those received<\/a> by members of the January 6, 2021 assault on the U.S. Capitol<\/a> \u2014 capped a case that is widely regarded as the Trump administration\u2019s first major victory<\/a> in its crackdown on left-wing activism<\/a>.<\/p>\n The defendants were convicted at trial in March. Prosecutors convinced a jury that the fact that the eight defendants present at the protest wore all black<\/a> and used the Signal encrypted messaging app supported their material support of terrorism charges. Sanchez Estrada was convicted of corruptly concealing a document or record and conspiracy to conceal documents.<\/p>\n Only one of the defendants, Benjamin Hanil Song, was accused of firing a gun at a police officer, who left the scene with an injury to his neck; Song was convicted of attempted murder. Still, federal guidelines calling for harsher sentences for all because of links to terrorism \u2014 which were applied by O\u2019Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, and U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, a Donald Trump appointee \u2014 meant that all the defendants faced long prison terms.<\/p>\n Their only hope ahead of the simultaneous twin hearings was that the two judges might break sharply with federal guidelines. Instead, O\u2019Connor and Pittman chose to make an example of the defendants.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Several defendants said Tuesday that they never intended to hurt anyone. Their only hope was to show solidarity with the detainees by staging a noise demonstration with fireworks, they said.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen I went to protest on the night of July 4, it seemed more like a party to me than anything else,\u201d Autumn Hill told the court Tuesday. \u201cWe didn\u2019t expect or want any violence or destruction of property to occur.\u201d<\/p>\n Prosecutors, however, seized on the fact that the protesters arrived at the scene with guns and fireworks. O\u2019Connor, the judge, said several times that the defendants had committed an \u201cassault on democracy.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhat happened here was not by any stretch of the imagination a protest,\u201d he said during the sentencing of one defendant.<\/p>\n So it went repeatedly in the two courtrooms as the judges brushed aside the defendants\u2019 assertions that they were attempting simply to show solidarity with the detainees inside the ICE facility. Song, the sole defendant convicted of attempted murder, received a 100-year prison sentence.<\/p>\n The other defendants\u2019 arguments that they should be distinguished from Song because they never fired a gun won them little relief.<\/p>\n Sanchez Estrada\u2019s wife, Maricela Rueda, received a 70-year sentence, longer than most of the other defendants because of her alleged role in a conspiracy to commit obstruction by asking Sanchez Estrada to move the zines after her arrest.<\/p>\n Hill, Savanna Batten, Zachary Evetts, Meagan Morris, and Elizabeth Soto all received 50-year sentences for their roles in protest at the Prairieland detention facility. A ninth defendant, Ines Soto, awaits a July sentencing.<\/p>\n The defendants\u2019 relatives and supporters said at a press conference after the sentencing that they had harbored few illusions about their likely sentences. They have now placed their hopes on appeals.<\/p>\n The Prairieland case<\/span> should be placed in the context of a larger crackdown on anti-government protesters, supporters said.<\/p>\n The protest that triggered the case came months before the September killing<\/a> of conservative activist Charlie Kirk<\/a>, which prompted President Donald Trump to issue an executive order purporting to designate antifa as a domestic terrorism group<\/a> and a presidential memo dubbed NSPM-7<\/a> calling for a broader crackdown on the left<\/a>. Following those directives, federal prosecutors upped the charges facing the Prairieland defendants. FBI Director Kash Patel also made clear the importance of the case to the Trump administration by posting about it on social media<\/a> in October.<\/p>\n In a press release Tuesday, the Justice Department hailed the case as \u201cthe first sentencing of defendants affiliated with Antifa following President Donald J. Trump\u2019s executive order designating the group as a Domestic Terrorist Organization in September 2025.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cToday\u2019s sentencings show the FBI remains committed to identifying, locating, and dismantling Antifa and its funding networks across the country,\u201d Patel said in a statement.<\/p>\n More indictments against activists<\/a> have followed since the issuing of NSPM-7, most recently the charges in Minnesota<\/a> earlier this month against 15 people accused of trying to impede federal agents during the immigration crackdown there.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not just here in the north Texas area,\u201d said Tamera Hutcherson, a local activist who served as a member of Batten\u2019s defense team. \u201cThis is also now in other parts of our country, and it concerns me what this means for our free speech, as well as our right to protest. If we are to bring a medical kit to a protest, does that mean we are a criminal now? If we are to even just attend a noise demonstration, does that mean we are a criminal now, and we may not return home to our loved ones?\u201d<\/p>\n \u201c If we are to bring a medical kit to a protest, does that mean we are a criminal now? \u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n Justice Department prosecutors pushed back against the idea that the defendants had been convicted merely for expressing their First Amendment rights. What distinguished them from other protesters was their belief that they were justified in using violence to accomplish their goals, said Frank Gatto, an assistant U.S. attorney for the northern district of Texas.<\/p>\n \u201cThe very crux here is their firm belief that the use of violence is justified,\u201d Gatto said during the sentencing of Evetts.<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/theintercept.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/AP26075825739015.jpg?fit=8194%2C5463\")
\n