From linked https://freedes.net/jun-23rd-2026-press-release/ : "Sanchez Estrada, a 39-year-old artist, was found guilty on March 13, 2026, alongside eight codefendants who participated in an anti-ICE protest at the controversial Alvarado ICE detention facility. Under the auspices of “National Security Presidential Memorandum-7,” which was issued after the killing of Christian nationalist influencer Charlie Kirk, Sanchez Estrada was federally charged with “corruptly concealing a document or record” for moving a box of zines the day after the protest. Although he was not present at the protest, nor did he know about it, prosecutors argued that the content of the literature made it evidence of the defendants’ material support for terrorism, and shockingly alleged that the decision to move the box was a conspiracy between Sanchez Estrada and his wife."
Very .. British approach to linking people to "terrorism" on the flimsiest pretext.
> "The prosecution claimed Sanchez moved the zines so they wouldn’t incriminate his wife, who attended a protest outside the Prairieland immigration detention center near Dallas, where a police officer was wounded by gunfire."
The "Texas man" in question was involved in evidence tampering in a case that involved the shooting of a police officer. The title here makes it sound like simply moving paper around is against the law.
But now that they are rounding people up, and Hacker News can be scraped and User Id's crosschecked with AI surveillance to dox.
I'm actually fearful, the war on free speech is working.
but someone being jailed for having a 'zine', is really a new level. nobody is safe.
Also since when does obstruction net you 30 years? And apparently the judge openly made a statement indicating unconstitutional bias on his part in court. So I guess the entire thing is a farce meant to intimidate the average joe.
Yeah, the judge is well aware that every court this case can be appealed to already agrees with him. The legal arguments and the facts of the case are causally disconnected from the outcome.
I would expect that at that point it ought to stop mattering whether the evidence being hidden actually would have been useful evidence.
I'm not loving this turn of phrase. Seems very Weasel-worded. Did not know about it according to who? I think we need a better news source.
Example quote:
>(h) The Attorney General shall issue specific guidance that ensures domestic terrorism priorities include politically motivated terrorist acts such as organized doxing campaigns, swatting, rioting, looting, trespass, assault, destruction of property, threats of violence, and civil disorder. This guidance shall also include an identification of any behaviors, fact patterns, recurrent motivations, or other indicia common to organizations and entities that coordinate these acts in order to direct efforts to identify and prevent potential violent activity.
> politically motivated terrorist acts such as ... civil disorder
I didn't realize the bar for terrorism had fallen so low.
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ice-detention-attack-defe...
If you don't have to prove thing then you end up with a situation where all sorts of mundane actions can be construed as covering something up.
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ice-detention-attack-defe...
We don't know if he was truly involved in any kind of evidence tampering, if he was prosecuted for it, or something else.
This is blatantly an advocacy piece, so that's not a valid assumption.
> U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor said he intended to “send a message to anyone who shares a similar ideology.”
> The following can be attributed to Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern:
“If prosecutors are correct that Sanchez moved zines because he feared they’d try to use them against his wife, that’s a commentary on prosecutors’ lawlessness, not Sanchez’s. Under the First Amendment, possessing literature cannot be criminal, so what legitimate evidence could he possibly have been concealing? Political zines like those Sanchez possessed are no different from the pro-Revolution pamphlets this country’s founders had in mind when they drafted the First Amendment’s press clause.
“Sanchez’s case is the latest example of the Trump administration grasping at any legal straws it can to criminalize disfavored ideologies and writings, from conflating dissent with terrorism to deporting immigrants who report on protests or criticize wars the U.S. bankrolls. Americans should not make the mistake of believing Sanchez’s sentence only threatens immigrants, leftists, or so-called Antifa members — they’re just the low-hanging fruit, not the end game.”> Under the First Amendment, possessing literature cannot be criminal
The existence of hate crime laws in the US says otherwise - political motivation to a crime has long been a component in sentencing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_...
Did the zines shoot the police officer? Or was the police officer shot with the zines?
functionmouse•1h ago
tartoran•1h ago
functionmouse•1h ago
tartoran•1h ago
zulux•1h ago
lanyard-textile•1h ago
verdverm•1h ago
There are some pretty standard anarchist / anti-government like zines.
You can find them on the various zine aggregators like: https://guides.library.illinois.edu/zines/online
Feminist culture coming out of the 70s also incorporates many of the same themes. The first one at the zine link, "Moral Revolution - Creating new values, undermining oppression, and connecting across difference" by Kriti Sharma is quite good.
projektfu•1h ago
jjgreen•1h ago