A federal jury on Friday convicted eight people on terrorism-related charges in connection with a shooting at a Texas immigration detention facility that prosecutors linked to antifa, a far-left movement frequently targeted by the Trump administration.
Jurors also returned guilty verdicts on several other counts, including attempted murder against one defendant whom prosecutors said opened fire outside the Prairieland Detention Center near Dallas last summer, wounding a police officer who was shot in the neck. Sentencing is scheduled for June.
The closely watched trial drew national attention beyond the Fort Worth courtroom, with some legal experts and critics describing it as a test of how far the government can go in prosecuting protest-related activity.
Attorneys for the defendants argued their clients were not members of antifa and had instead organized a “noise demonstration” to show support for immigrants detained as part of the Trump administration’s mass deportation efforts.
FBI Director Kash Patel has called the Texas case the first time a material support to terrorism charge has targeted people accused of being antifa members.
Short for “anti-fascists,” antifa is not a single organization but rather an umbrella term for far-left-leaning militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations.
Protesters denied having antifa ties
Defense attorneys told jurors that there was no plan for violence on July 4 outside the facility in Alvarado, Texas.
There were nine defendants on trial in all, eight of whom faced a charge of providing material support to terrorists. Lawyers for the defendants said their clients were not members of antifa.
Prosecutor Shawn Smith told jurors during closing arguments that the group’s actions — including bringing firearms, first aid kids and wearing body armor — were all signals of the group’s intent. He said they practiced “antifa tactics,” and were “obsessed with operational security.”
“This was not a peaceful protest, this was a direct action,” Smith said.
Attorneys for the defendants have said there was no planned ambush and that protesters who brought firearms only did so for their own protection.
The case, defense attorney Blake Burns told jurors, is about the government trying to characterize protesters as terrorists in order to put them in prison.
First-of-its-kind case tests First Amendment rights
The terrorism charges did not require a tie to any organization, and there is no domestic equivalent to the State Department’s list of foreign terror organizations. That’s in part because organizations operating within the United States are protected by broad First Amendment rights.
Critics of the Justice Department’s case have said the outcome could have wide-reaching effects on protests.
“That opposition is something that the government wants to squash so a case like this helps the government kind of see 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,” said Suzanne Adely, interim president of the National Lawyers Guild, a progressive legal group.
Trial focused on shots fired outside detention center
Attorneys for the defendants have said that most protesters began leaving when two guards from the center came outside. That was before any shots were fired.
Prosecutors said Song, a former U.S. Marine Corps reservist, yelled “get to the rifles” and opened fire, striking one police officer who had just pulled up to the center.
Though it was defendant Benjamin Song who opened fire, the prosecution charged several other protesters with attempted murder of a law officer and discharging a firearm, arguing that from the group’s planning, it was foreseeable that a shooting could happen.
The officer who was shot, Alvarado Police Lt. Thomas Gross, testified that when responding to the scene he saw a person clad in all-black with their face covered and carrying a rifle. He told jurors he was shot with a round that went into his shoulder and out of his neck.
Song’s attorney, Phillip Hayes, told jurors during closing arguments that there wasn’t a call to arms within the group before Gross “came in hot” with gunfire. Hayes suggested that Song’s shots were “suppressive fire,” and that the ricochet bullet is what hit the officer.
“This case has been overcharged from the beginning,” Hayes said.
Leading up to the trial, several people pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists after being accused of supporting antifa. They face up to 15 years in prison at sentencing.
Some of them testified for the prosecution, including Seth Sikes, who said he went to detention center because he wanted to bring some joy to those held inside.
“I felt like I was doing the right thing,” he said.
