The government secured a conviction in its first case alleging material support for terrorism against individuals accused of affiliation with “antifa.” President Donald Trump designated “antifa” as a domestic terror group in 2025, despite the fact that no such organized group exists and the president has no legal authority to designate organizations as domestic terror groups.
A Landmark Verdict
On Friday, a federal jury in Fort Worth, Texas, convicted eight people of domestic terrorism. The conviction stemmed from their presence at a protest outside Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas, on July 4, 2025. During the protest, one participant shot and wounded a police officer. Legal experts suggest the verdict could embolden the administration’s efforts to suppress dissent.
Suzanne Adely, interim president of the National Lawyers Guild, told The Associated Press, “A case like this helps the government kind of notice how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protests and also helps them kind of intimidate, increase the fear, hoping that folks in other cities then will think twice over protesting.”
The administration indicated this would be the first of many such cases.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement, “Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization that has been allowed to flourish in Democrat-led cities — not under President Trump. Today’s verdict on terrorism charges will not be the last as the Trump administration systematically dismantles Antifa and finally halts their violence on America’s streets.”
The Events at Prairieland
The trial centered on a protest where participants intended to set off fireworks in solidarity with approximately 1,000 migrants detained at the Prarieland ICE facility. Some participants were armed, which is legal in Texas, as reported by The Intercept.
According to Sam Levine in The Guardian, the situation escalated when a few protesters began vandalizing property, including cars and a guard shack, and slashing a government van’s tires. After ICE guards asked them to stop, a police officer arrived and drew his weapon. One protester, armed with an AR-15, shot the officer in the shoulder, and the officer survived.
Initially, those arrested faced charges of “attempted murder of a police officer,” according to NOTUS. However, following Trump’s designation of antifa as a terror group and the release of National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), which directs federal law enforcement to target left-leaning groups, the government expanded the case to include terrorism charges.
One defense lawyer, speaking on background to NOTUS, stated, “This wouldn’t be a terrorism case if it weren’t for that memo.”
Prosecutors argued that wearing black clothing to the protest constituted material support for terrorism. Assistant U.S. Attorney Shawn Smith stated during closing arguments, as reported by The Intercept, “Providing your body as camouflage for others to do the enumerated acts is providing support. It’s impossible to tell who is doing what. That’s the point.”
The defense cautioned the jury about the free speech implications of the charges. Blake Burns, an attorney for defendant Elizabeth Soto, argued, according to The Guardian, “The government is asking you to put protesters in prison as terrorists. You are the only people who can stop that.”
The Verdict and Aftermath
The jury convicted eight defendants of material support for terrorism, as well as riot, conspiracy to apply and carry an explosive, and use and carry of an explosive. They dismissed charges related to a pre-planned ambush and acquitted four defendants of attempted murder and discharging a firearm during a crime. Only Benjamin Song, the alleged shooter, was charged with attempted murder and discharging a firearm.
The jury also convicted Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada of conspiracy to conceal documents for moving a box of zines from his wife’s home after her arrest, according to The Intercept.
Sanchez Estrada’s attorney, Christopher Weinbel, stated, as reported by AP, “The U.S. Lost today with this verdict.”
Support the Prarieland Defendants said in a statement, “Everything about this trial from beginning to conclude has proven what we have said all along: What we have is a sham trial, built on political persecution and ideological attacks coming from the top.”
Outside observers expressed concern about the implications for the right to protest. Cory Archibald, co-founder of Track AIPAC, said, “Remember all the people who dismissed the alarm over NSPM-7 because ‘ANTIFA isn’t even a real organization’? We told you that didn’t matter. When the villain is a made-up boogeyman then the target becomes ‘anyone who disagrees with Trump’ — and this is the result.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What charges were the eight defendants convicted of?
The eight defendants were convicted of material support for terrorism, as well as riot, conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and use and carry of an explosive.
What was the initial charge against those arrested after the protest?
The initial charge against those arrested was “attempted murder of a police officer.”
What is National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7)?
National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) directs federal law enforcement to target left-leaning groups and activities.
Given this verdict, what impact might this have on future protests and the exercise of First Amendment rights?
