30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech • Hacker News Board

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

#471

Post by jmyeet » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

nylonstrung wrote: post #421

xrd wrote: post #3

Up until now these crazy cases have been rejected by the courts. But this feels like a crack in the dam. A judge actually sentenced someone to 30 years for hiding zines, zines that had been published for years. This was under the pretense hiding those zines was hiding evidence of criminality. And the criminality was worth 75 years. For someone who was at a protest where a federal agent was shot, but was not the shoot…

Insane to think they'd have gotten a small fraction of the sentence had they been distributing CSAM they produced instead Apparently Marxist film reviews and gardening tips are more criminal than child pornography

This isn't even a theoretical comparison. Consider the case of popular far-right influencer Dom Lucre. In 2023, he uploaded screenshots from what is apparently a "known" CSAM video. Not only that but he watermarked the screenshots, showing he had the screenshots on a computer he had access to and likely had access to the source video itself. Mere possession of this should land you in jail.

One side of the story is that Elon Musk personally intervened to unban him for this [1], which is a whole other aspect to this. But the Feds, as far as we know, never charged him. This leads many (including myself) to believe Dom Lucre is an asset to the FBI already.

Jeffrey Epstein was charged for his pedophile ring. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted but is now sitting in a Work camp she should never be in for her crimes. And she was charged with trafficking. To whom exactly? Nobody has ever been charged or even named as being who minors were trafficked to. At least 4 presidents have sat on a mountain of evidence of this and done precisely nothing. The last president (Biden) and his AG (Garland) even sat on these files when the current president was credibly implicated.

And of course there are the January 6 ringleaders who were convicted of seditious conspiracy (22, 18 and 18 years) for attempting to overthrow the government and storming the Capitol. All pardoned now of course.

But sure, 30 years for moving a box of zines.

[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-...

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

#472

Post by 9x39 » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

pcrh wrote: post #459

9x39 wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prosecutors were successful in using them as evidence of connection between the members, and as a result of building that connection partly through the zines, held them jointly accountable for the groups overall actions. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41...

You will notice that the criticism this judgement receives if not for finding Song guilty, even if the sentence is inordinately long for a non-lethal crime with minor wider repercussions. The criticism this judgement receives is the fact that the prosecutors and judge drew these lines of association into a "terrorist organization" so much that even merely possessing literature tangentially related to this non-existen…

I do see the criticism, but those critics appear made unwilling to accept that material support to other bad actors snares one in their web. No people were punished for mere possession, you or I could possess those zines and even email the prosecution about it.

This shouldn’t be such a leap, but rationalizing is what it is.

The hefty punishments are principally from the punishment enhancements meted out for the alleged terrorist label, firearms, wounded police, etc that overflow from the chief perpetrators onto those caught in the web through membership and their support.

Perhaps hiding evidence should be merely hiding evidence, not hiding evidence in the burying of a highly political prosecution where someone is catching life plus cancer, yet here we are.

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

#473

Post by ruszki » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 1:40 PM UTC

vrganj wrote: post #360

N_Lens wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN swings pretty far right.

[flagged]

I think fascism is just a symptom. People here do the same thing with Apple for example. Yesterday, I could induce cognitive dissonance quite easily, the same way when they encounter irrevocable fact against their faith in fascism. The exact same reaction with their faith in Apple.

But I understand, they are disappointed in democracy, and when they should disappoint in the thing which is presented them as the exact opposite, there would be nothing, and that’s scary. Of course, they fucked up their belief system at the first place, where they started to think about democracies in a black and white way.

The same thing with Apple. They disappointed in Google, then Apple. Then what kind of phone can you choose?

I have two 5 years oldish nieces. And looking back to kids’ world, almost everything (but that “almost” is quite new) teaches them to view the world as black and white, when most of the things are grey. I’m not sure that I ever got a teaching which tries to help this contradiction. How to choose between two wrongs. Many will base their choice on faith, and since their conditioning taught them that there is only black and white, something needs to be white. No matter what.

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

#474

Post by vel0city » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 1:43 PM UTC

BobbyJo wrote: post #323

vel0city wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> "but what about.." I don't know. > Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Yes. A zine put together by a group that later goes on to commit a crime together, that promotes the ideologies underlying the crime, feels like the kind of thing a search warrant/subpoena would apply to. The fact that the person involved in the crime asked that they be hidden makes it pretty obvious that they sa…

If these zines were like "here's how to attack an ICE facility" or directly promoting imminent violence against officers I'd understand.

Is that what these zines were about? From the zines I've seen they're all pretty general anarchist kind of materials. One of the zines was arguing the morality of squatting a residence. Is that evidence of committing violence against an ICE facility?

If there really was materials directly related to promoting imminent violence against ICE officers or materials directly related to planning the attack, please do point it out. I haven't seen anything like that yet though. I'd agree that would be evidence of the crimes involved. Just random anarchist ramblings though?

Then, finally on top of that 30 years for this seems incredibly excessive. We let child sexual abusers in Texas walk free after only 30 days in a county jail while moving some magazines gets you 30 years. Tell me again how this is justice.

This is the modern Republican party. 30 years for moving political magazines. 30 days for sexually assaulting a child.

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

#475

Post by axus » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 1:50 PM UTC

glitch003 wrote: post #114

axus wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were transporting copies of this magazine, am I concealing evidence? What is special about this guy? Is there anything he could have legally transported, or is everything she's written banned? The irony of The Intercept requiring my identity is funny.

she called her husband, from jail, and asked him to move them so they couldn't be used in court against her. she said "do whatever you have to do". the cops listened to the phone call, watched him load them into the car and arrested him on the drive. i think it's pretty straightforward that she was asking for his help in obstructing the investigation by hiding potential evidence against her.

I am asking those questions in good faith, to explore the new limits on free speech, and don't see any direct answers. What happens to this guy specifically is only interesting as far as it affects everyone else in the US.

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

#476

Post by mindslight » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:23 PM UTC

gmueckl wrote: post #242

wat10000 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have not enough imagination to come up with a scenario where making a sandwich would create concern that it might obstruct an investigation. But obstruction is defined by intent and outcome, not the exact means. Abstractions like this are common and necessary in law. So, in your example you'd still be guilty.

Make and leave a sandwich on your counter in case the investigators are similar to the ones who busted up Afroman's house, and you hope that being satiated will make them less diligent.

This actually seems like a halfway good analogy to this case. You're intending to obstruct the investigators, but only if they engage in their own illegality - stealing your sandwich or prosecuting based on political speech.

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

#477

Post by Tadpole9181 » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:26 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #275

stevenwoo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless one is a right wing protestor like Kyle Rittenhouse.

Still dont see how people could have watched the videos and not seen a clear self defense angle.

There was never an argument that the 30 second clip shows self defense.

The problem is that Kyle drove out of his way with a non-defensive firearm, with a clear intent to put himself in that situation so he could murder someone.

Let's say I want to experience killing someone without consequences. I leave a nice bike completely unlocked in the bad part of town and hide in the shadows, then when someone tries to steal it, I axe them in the back of the head. I'm clearly a criminal guilty of first degree murder, not a victim of theft.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how much nuance the American legislative system has for cases like those. Let alone when exposed to the biases our executive/judicial systems have when executing them.

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

#478

Post by wat10000 » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:27 PM UTC

gmueckl wrote: post #242

wat10000 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have not enough imagination to come up with a scenario where making a sandwich would create concern that it might obstruct an investigation. But obstruction is defined by intent and outcome, not the exact means. Abstractions like this are common and necessary in law. So, in your example you'd still be guilty.

The "and outcome" is my point. It has to actually be something that could be a problem. Similar to how it's not attempted murder to cast a magic spell intending to kill someone with it, no matter how sincerely you believe in the magic.

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

#479

Post by BobbyJo » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:30 PM UTC

vel0city wrote: post #474

BobbyJo wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "but what about.." I don't know. > Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Yes. A zine put together by a group that later goes on to commit a crime together, that promotes the ideologies underlying the crime, feels like the kind of thing a search warrant/subpoena would apply to. The fact that the person involved in the crime asked that they be hidden makes it pretty obvious that they sa…

If these zines were like "here's how to attack an ICE facility" or directly promoting imminent violence against officers I'd understand. Is that what these zines were about? From the zines I've seen they're all pretty general anarchist kind of materials. One of the zines was arguing the morality of squatting a residence. Is that evidence of committing violence against an ICE facility? If there really was materials di…

> Is that evidence of committing violence against an ICE facility?

Again, the zines relevance isn't proving they did it. It's providing context and intent. If you can't see the connection between anarchist pamphlets and trying to raid a government facility, then I don't know what else to say.

The "imminent violence" only matters if the pamphlets were themselves the crime, and they were not. To go back toy earlier example, If I buy a criminal a bus ticket to help them escape, I can be charged with a crime even though bus tickets are perfectly legal.

> Then, finally on top of that 30 years for this seems incredibly excessive.

It is, but if it's in the statutes, then its up to the judge. Obviously they wanted to make an example out of these people.

> We let child sexual abusers in Texas walk free after only 30 days

Sounds like a completely separate problem that needs solving IMO.

> This is the modern Republican party. 30 years for moving political magazines. 30 days for sexually assaulting a child.

I think sentencing is mostly left to judges, which are not elected political officials.

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

#480

Post by Tadpole9181 » Tue, Jun 30, 2026, 2:30 PM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #427

Xorakios wrote: post #12

Here's the case: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/antifa-cell-members-con... The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation being sought under a federal warrant after being called by his wife and asking him to do so. The warrant was for documentation after the protesters shot fireworks to bring out first responders from the ICE facility, and allegedly one of the group shot a responder in the neck instead of th…

Let's not ignore the fact that: - The group was designated as "Antifa cell", and thus this became a terrorist and aiding terrorism charges. - The judge went above and beyond to hand out harsh punishments. There's been commentary from previous state prosecutors that the sentences, and how they were carried out, were much harsher than predicted. The speculation was that these sentences are being handed out to be served…

I would be shocked if this doesn't get overturned on the basis that the judge hand selected the jury without allowing participation of the defense.