One Trial Defendant, Two Defendants Who Took Non-Cooperating Plea Deals, and Four Defendants Who Took Cooperating Plea Deals Will Be Sentenced on Wednesday
FORT WORTH, TX – One week after a Fort Worth federal court imposed shocking and unprecedented 30-100 year sentences for nine Prairieland defendants convicted in March, the US District Court will sentence another seven defendants on Wednesday, July 1. Trial defendant Ines Soto, convicted of rioting, conspiracy to use an explosive, and providing material support to terrorists, will be sentenced by Judge Reed O’Connor, the same judge who sentenced four Prairieland defendants last week. Judge O’Connor will also sentence two defendants who took non-cooperating plea deals—Joy “Rowan” Gibson and Rebecca Morgan.
Judge O’Connor relied on a “deterrence” rationale when imposing the draconian sentences last week against Prairieland defendants.With deep and long-standing ties to the Federalist Society, he employed rarely-used terrorism enhancements last week to trigger mandatory minimum prison terms and additionally ordered their sentences to be served consecutively instead of concurrently. Notably, Judge O’Connor sentenced Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada, who wasn’t even present at the noise demonstration, to 30 years in prison for moving a box of First Amendment-protected literature and art unrelated to the case from one location to another.
US District Judge Mark Pittman—a Trump appointee, founding member of the Fort Worth Chapter of the Federalist Society, and the trial judge who was responsible for sentencing Benjamin Song last week to 100 years in prison—will sentence four defendants on Wednesday who cooperated with the prosecution.
What: Federal sentencing of additional Prairieland defendants
When: Wednesday, July 1, 2026 at 8:30am
Where: Federal Courthouse, 501 West 10th Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102
Supporters will hold a press conference, featuring statements by defendants, family members, and community and faith leaders, outside the courthouse at 11am or when sentencing concludes.
“This case is about far more than the Prairieland demonstrators,” said Sufia Khalid, Deputy Director of the National Security Criminal Defense Center at the Muslim Legal Fund of America, and legal counsel for Prairieland defendant Maricela Rueda, who was sentenced last week to 70 years in prison.“It asks whether the government may continue expanding terrorism statutes into the realm of domestic political protest and then obtain 50 to 100 year sentences of imprisonment based on sentencing theories the jury itself rejected,” continued Khalid. “Those are profound constitutional questions involving due process, proportionality, and the First Amendment. We will be seeking careful appellate review of the abuses in this case.”
In light of the egregious sentencing and trial irregularities, nonprofits, politicians, and pundits have brought renewed attention to the Prairieland case and the precedent set for those engaging in anti-ICE protest. Similar attempts in Minnesota, Michigan, and Spokane by the Trump administration to target left-wing protest have added to growing concerns that the Prairieland case will serve as a blueprint for politically motivated prosecutions. “Protests are a protected human right,” stated Amnesty International last week. “The Trump administration continues to misuse overly broad and vaguely defined ‘domestic terrorism’ charges against anyone it deems to be ‘antifa,’” continued the statement. “These charges are not only politically motivated, but they are a serious abuse of criminal law to target dissent and neutralize opposition.”
Minutes before last week’s sentencing, Judges Pittman and O’Connor dismissed numerous motions to overturn the convictions without providing written rulings and with little-to-no explanation. All nine trial defendants filed motions for a new trial, detailing how the government failed to provide the necessary evidence for a conviction and instead put on a trial that was “saturated with evidence designed to evoke fear, political bias, and guilt by association,” according to one of the motions. Another motion details potential juror misconduct. Prairieland defendants have vowed to fight their convictions and will be filing appeals in the following weeks.
From the beginning, supporters have argued the federal Prairieland defendants were denied a fair trial—from the prosecutor referring to them, without evidence, as a North Texas “antifa terror cell,” to prejudicial actions taken at the highest levels of government, to court decisions that limited their defense, including sanctioning and threatening defense counsel, declaring a mistrial when the prospective jury pool appeared sympathetic to the defendants, and denying Benjamin Song a ‘defense of another’ argument at trial.
The Prairieland cases, involving 22 people charged with both state and federal charges, stem from a noise demonstration in solidarity with detainees at the Prairieland ICE Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas, on July 4, 2025. After the protest, an officer with the Alvarado Police Department arrived on the scene, quickly drawing his gun and pointing it at departing protesters. Shots were fired and the officer allegedly sustained minor injuries, but authorities have never provided hospital records to justify these claims. Alvarado police arrested ten people in the area, and a dozen more were arrested over the following several months.
Visit the Prairieland website for revealing information that debunks the dominant narratives which have been perpetuated by the government in its aim to criminalize anti-ICE resistance: https://prairielanddefendants.com.