Nine defendants faced a Fort Worth, Texas federal jury Wednesday as the U.S. Department of Justice and defense attorneys delivered closing arguments in what is the first federal case bringing terrorism charges connected to antifa. The jury is expected to begin deliberations Thursday.
The two-week trial centers on a July 4, 2025 shooting at the Prairieland Detention Center, a North Texas facility operated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in which a police officer was shot. President Donald Trump signed an executive order last year designating antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, and the Prairieland case is the proving ground for that designation in a federal courtroom.
According to Courthouse News Service, The defendants face a serious stack of federal charges: rioting, providing material support to terrorists, use and carry of an explosive, attempted murder of U.S. government employees, and discharging a firearm during a violent crime. One defendant, Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada, who was not present at the event, is charged with concealing evidence after the fact.
Prosecutors say what they describe as an "antifa cell" conspired to attack the Prairieland facility, shooting fireworks at it and vandalizing property before the situation escalated into gunfire after police arrived. Prosecutors allege that defendant Benjamin Song, whom they describe as the group's ringleader, shot the police officer.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Shawn Smith argued that the defendants arrived equipped with guns, body armor, and first-aid kits, evidence they intended to ambush the facility rather than stage a protest. Smith also pointed to what he called "black bloc" tactics, in which demonstrators wear all black to conceal their identities, as proof of a coordinated plan.
It's impossible to tell who's doing what,
Smith told jurors, describing the deliberate anonymity built into the group's approach. He said the tactics on display were "hallmarks" of antifa.
That's why understanding antifa is important to this case,
Smith added, tying the group's structure directly to the government's theory of organized conspiracy rather than spontaneous protest.
Several defendants beyond Song are charged with attempted murder under the legal doctrine known as Pinkerton liability, which allows co-conspirators to be held responsible for reasonably foreseeable crimes committed by members of their conspiracy. In plain terms, if you join a criminal plot, you can be convicted for what your co-conspirators do in furtherance of that plot, even if you did not pull the trigger yourself.
Prosecutors argue it was reasonably foreseeable that Song would shoot the officer. In rebuttal closing arguments, Assistant U.S. Attorney Frank Gatto compared the situation to a group conspiring to rob a bank where one participant ends up shooting someone. The logic: when you arrive armed and masked to attack a federal facility, violence is a predictable outcome, not an accident.
Defense attorneys offered a starkly different account. They argued the gathering was meant to be a peaceful "noise demonstration" in support of detainees inside the facility. An attorney for defendant Zachary Evetts told the jury that protesters set off fireworks to send "a message of hope to the foreigner who resides in our land."
Song's defense attorney acknowledged the shooting was "a tragedy" but argued that no one intended to harm anyone. Attempted murder, the attorney argued, requires proof of intent to kill. The defense suggested the gunfire may have been "suppressive fire" intended to distract the officer, who had pointed his weapon at a fleeing protester.
An attorney for defendant Maricela Rueda took aim at the government's broader strategy.
This is an experiment for them. But this courtroom is not a laboratory, and Maricela is not a lab rat.
That framing, that the government is testing an untried legal theory on real people, is the defense's most direct challenge to the DOJ's use of terrorism charges against antifa-linked defendants.
U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman previously ruled that the defendants cannot argue self-defense or defense of another as justification for the shooting. That ruling narrowed the defense's options considerably. During Song's closing argument, prosecutors objected, saying the defense was attempting to raise a claim the court had already barred.
The defense did not call any witnesses during the two-week trial. Jurors did hear testimony from multiple witnesses, including individuals arrested in connection with the incident who later accepted plea deals.
The jury will weigh the competing versions: a planned ambush by an organized antifa cell armed for violence, or a protest gone wrong where no one intended to hurt anyone. The charges span from rioting to providing material support to terrorists, and the verdicts will determine whether the federal government's framework for prosecuting antifa as an organized terrorist group holds up under the standard that matters most, proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Authorities have not publicly identified the police officer who was shot. The specific counts facing each individual defendant have not been publicly broken out. What is clear is the scope: nine people, terrorism charges, a shot officer, and a federal jury that will now decide whether showing up in black bloc with guns and body armor to attack an ICE facility on Independence Day qualifies as something more than a protest that got out of hand.
