30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

Post by ibejoeb » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:27 AM UTC

RIMR wrote: post #117

mvdtnz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was this a "demonstration" though? They turned up to a detention center in the middle of the night and launched an attack clearly with the intention of getting past the gate (text message exchanges show they had scoped out the operations of the gate, how long it takes to open/close, how long it remains open, etc). That's not really a "demonstration", no one outside of the facility would even see it. Demonstrations sh…

That's really hard to swallow when the current president, who is responsible for the extreme uptick in ICE activity, pardoned 1,600 people who conspired against the federal government in favor of his agenda, but then that same government hands life-ruining prison sentences to people who weren't even present for conspiring against ICE. Especially when the crux of this entire case was that the convicted are members of…

Post by thunderfork » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:27 AM UTC

Post by MichaelZuo » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:33 AM UTC

vel0city wrote: post #185

BobbyJo wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not illegal "because you think its illegal", it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant". If I hide someone who I think did a crime to help them escape police, I've now implicated myself in the crime, whether or not my trying to hide them actually caused them to get away with it.

> it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant" And yet when Trump does it with classified documents its not a problem. Where's his 30 years? Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Are these zines even relevant evidence? Is everyone who has these magazines also now a criminal? What about other radical…

Post by jrexilius » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:39 AM UTC

Post by aaron695 » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:50 AM UTC

wat10000 wrote: post #158

will4274 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being aware that he was moving the zines to obstruct a federal felony investigation is surely relevant. Intent is an important aspect of crime.

Intent is important but it’s not sufficient. Intent to obstruct isn’t enough. You have to actually intend to do something that would count as obstruction. It’s not illegal for me to make a sandwich even if I sincerely believe that making this sandwich will obstruct a felony investigation.