Prairieland Detention Center Attack: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences

The Prairieland Detention Center attack took place on the night of July 4, 2025, when at least 11 people in black clothing and face coverings arrived at the ICE facility in Alvarado, Texas, set off fireworks, vandalized the building and vehicles, and shot an Alvarado police lieutenant in the neck when he responded to a 911 call. Twenty-two people were eventually charged federally. Nine went to trial and were convicted in March 2026 on counts including providing material support to terrorists; in June 2026, eight of them received prison sentences ranging from 30 to 100 years.¹

What Happened on July 4, 2025

A peaceful protest took place at the Prairieland Detention Center during the afternoon of July 4, 2025. Federal prosecutors later alleged that some participants used the daytime demonstration to scout the facility’s security.²

Late that night, prosecutors said, at least 11 people returned dressed in black clothing and face coverings, a tactic known as “black bloc.” They carried 11 firearms, body armor, and military-grade first aid kits, and many used Faraday bags or turned off their phones to avoid tracking. The group set off fireworks, spray-painted the building, punctured tires, destroyed surveillance cameras, and vandalized vehicles.²

A front-desk worker called 911, reporting fireworks and someone trying to get into the building.³ Alvarado Police Lt. Thomas Gross responded. According to trial testimony, he was shot within seconds of arriving; the bullet struck his neck and exited through his back. Prosecutors alleged that defendant Benjamin Song yelled “get to the rifles!” and opened fire with an AR-15.⁴ Gross was airlifted to a Fort Worth hospital, received stitches and pain medication, and was released several hours later. He testified that the wound still hurt and that it was “a day I’m going to have to live with for the rest of my life.”⁵

Most participants were arrested near the scene that night. Song eluded capture until July 15, when the FBI located him in Dallas.⁶

Who Was Charged

Twenty-two people ultimately faced federal charges. Prosecutors described them as a “North Texas antifa cell” led by Benjamin Hanil Song, a 32-year-old former U.S. Marine Corps reservist from Dallas. The indictment alleged Song recruited members at gun ranges and combat training sessions, that the group communicated through an encrypted messaging app with auto-deleting messages, that they had collectively acquired more than 50 firearms in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and that they distributed insurrectionary pamphlets known as “zines.”⁷⁸

Defense witnesses offered a different account. They testified at trial that they did not belong to any organization called “antifa” and that the protest was meant to show solidarity with detained migrants. Reporting in The Guardian described the group as activists loosely affiliated through a local left-wing book club and gun group.⁴ Defense attorney Sufia Khalid said her client Maricela Rueda was an artist and mother with no criminal history.⁹

Nine defendants went to trial: Cameron Arnold (also known as Autumn Hill), Zachary Evetts, Benjamin Song, Savanna Batten, Bradford Morris (also known as Meagan Morris), Maricela Rueda, Elizabeth Soto, Ines Soto, and Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada. Seven others — Nathan Baumann, Joy Gibson, Susan Kent, Rebecca Morgan, Lynette Sharp, John Thomas, and Seth Sikes — pleaded guilty to one count each of providing material support to terrorists.⁷

The Federal Charges

The case was prosecuted in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Frank Gatto and Shawn Smith.⁷ Charges varied by defendant but included:

Riot, charged against all nine trial defendants.
Providing material support to terrorists, charged against all nine.
Conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and use of an explosive, with the fireworks characterized as explosives.
Attempted murder of federal employees and an Alvarado police officer, charged against Song, Arnold, Evetts, Morris, and Rueda.
Discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, charged against the same five.
Corruptly concealing a document or record, charged against Sanchez-Estrada, who was not present at the protest but was accused of moving materials at his wife Rueda’s request after her arrest.

The Trial and Verdicts

The trial began on February 17, 2026, at the Eldon B. Mahon U.S. Courthouse in Fort Worth and lasted roughly three weeks, presided over by U.S. District Judges Mark Pittman and Reed O’Connor.¹ Before jury selection, Judge Pittman declared a mistrial after defense attorney MarQuetta Clayton wore a shirt depicting civil rights leaders while questioning potential jurors.¹⁰ Pittman also struck down a self-defense argument raised by Song.¹¹ The defense rested without calling a single witness.

On March 13, 2026, the jury convicted all nine defendants. Song was convicted of attempted murder and three counts of discharging a firearm in addition to the terrorism-related charges. Evetts, Arnold (Hill), and Morris were acquitted of attempted murder and the firearms counts but convicted on the riot, material support, and explosives charges.⁴

The Sentences

On June 23, 2026, the court sentenced eight defendants. The judges ordered sentences on each count to run consecutively rather than concurrently, producing these total prison terms:

Benjamin Song: 100 years.
Maricela Rueda: 70 years.
Autumn Hill, Zachary Evetts, Meagan Morris, Savanna Batten, and Elizabeth Soto: 50 years each.
Daniel Sanchez-Estrada: 30 years.

Every defendant present at the facility on July 4 was also ordered to pay $4,408.95 in restitution to the Prairieland Detention Center.¹²

Ines Soto, convicted at trial, and the seven defendants who pleaded guilty — Baumann, Gibson, Kent, Morgan, Sharp, Thomas, and Sikes — were scheduled for sentencing on July 1, 2026. Each plea defendant faced up to 15 years.¹

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche endorsed the outcome, saying “Antifa terrorists who attack law enforcement and federal facilities will face swift and uncompromising justice.”⁹ Chief Judge O’Connor called the attack an “assault on Democracy.”¹ Song addressed the court at sentencing: “This is mass punishment. Collective punishment. This is guilt by association. This is injustice.”¹³

Why the Sentences Are Being Challenged

Two legal choices by prosecutors and judges account for the length of the terms and are the focus of planned appeals.

The first was the use of 18 U.S.C. § 2339A, the federal statute prohibiting material support to terrorists. The statute does not limit itself to international terrorism, but a Just Security analysis noted that domestic applications have typically involved plots against critical infrastructure, and that using property damage to government buildings as the predicate offense lacks recent precedent.¹⁴

The second was the “terrorism enhancement” under federal sentencing guidelines, which treats defendants as career offenders and recommends maximum sentences on every count. A Harvard Law Review analysis observed that judges have historically been reluctant to apply the enhancement because of its severity; in the January 6 Capitol cases, at least one judge declined to use it to avoid “unwarranted sentencing disparities.”¹⁵

Defense attorney Sufia Khalid called the sentences “unconstitutional” and pointed to a “massive, unwarranted sentencing disparity” compared with January 6 defendants, whose average sentence she put at 26 months. She called the terrorism enhancement “overkill” and an “abuse of discretion.”⁹ Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights said the convictions set a “dangerous precedent” by treating the possession and distribution of political pamphlets as evidence of terrorism, and called the terrorism charges “excessive” for the context.¹³ Former DOJ domestic terrorism counsel Tom Brzozowski warned the approach risked discouraging ordinary citizens from exercising their First Amendment rights.¹⁶

The prosecution unfolded alongside two executive actions by President Trump in September 2025: a September 22 executive order designating “antifa” as a domestic terrorist organization, and National Security Presidential Memorandum 7, signed three days later, directing the Justice Department to prosecute domestic political violence “to the maximum extent permissible by law.”¹⁷¹⁸ The Brennan Center for Justice concluded that the executive order was “ungrounded in fact and law,” noting that no statute authorizes the president to designate domestic organizations as terrorist groups.¹⁹

The defendants and their supporters, organized through the DFW Support Committee and the National Lawyers Guild, have said they intend to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.¹⁰

1
U.S. Department of Justice. Leader of Antifa Cell Members Sentenced to 100 Years
2
U.S. Department of Justice. Antifa Cell Members Convicted in Prairieland ICE Detention Center Shooting
3
CBS News Texas. Prairieland ICE Facility Attack Evidence Released
4
The Guardian. Prairieland ICE Protesters Texas Sentenced
5
KERA News. Prairieland Detention Center Shooting Trial Begins
6
U.S. Department of Justice. FBI Captures Alleged Prairieland Shooter Benjamin Hanil Song
7
U.S. Department of Justice. Antifa Cell Members Indicted in Prairieland Shooting
8
ABC 7 New York. Former US Marine Corps Reservist Charged in Texas Immigration Detention Center Shooting
9
Democracy Now. The Prairieland Nine
10
Texas Observer. Prairieland Antifa Verdict Threatens Anti-Trump Resistance
11
KERA News. Prairieland ICE Shooting Trial Week 3 Recap
12
Houston Public Media. Prairieland Shooter Gets 100 Years, Others 30-70
13
The Guardian. Prairieland Texas ICE Protests Zines
14
Just Security. How a Broadly Defined Counterterrorism Statute Could Be Abused
15
Harvard Law Review. Responding to Domestic Terrorism: A Crisis of Legitimacy
16
KERA News. Antifa Alvarado ICE Terrorism Trial Texas
17
The White House. Designating Antifa as a Domestic Terrorist Organization
18
The White House. Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence
19
Brennan Center for Justice. Trump’s Orders Targeting Antifascism Aim to Criminalize Opposition