Politics March 13, 2026

Nine Convicted in Texas ICE Center Shooting; Eight Found Guilty on Terrorism-Related Counts

Federal jury convicts defendants after 12-day trial in non-fatal July 4 attack at Alvarado immigration facility; defense signals appeal

By Nina Shah
Nine Convicted in Texas ICE Center Shooting; Eight Found Guilty on Terrorism-Related Counts

A federal jury in Texas convicted nine people for their roles in a July 4 shooting at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Alvarado, Texas. Eight of the nine were found guilty on terrorism-related charges including providing material support to terrorists and using explosives during a riot. Officials said the case marks the first time federal prosecutors charged alleged members of the antifa movement with terrorism.

Key Points

  • A federal jury in Texas convicted nine people for a July 4 shooting at an ICE detention center in Alvarado; eight were found guilty on terrorism-related counts.
  • Officials said the defendants were dressed in black military-style clothing with head and face coverings during the attack; authorities characterized them as linked to antifa, designated last year by President Donald Trump as a domestic terrorist organization.
  • Sectors affected include immigration enforcement and public safety, with potential implications for law enforcement resourcing and political risk assessments used by investors and insurers.

A federal jury in Texas on Friday returned guilty verdicts for nine individuals accused of carrying out a shooting at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center last year, the Justice Department said.

Local media reported that eight of the nine defendants were convicted on counts that included providing material support to terrorists, rioting, conspiring to use and carry explosives, and using explosives during a riot. The convictions followed a 12-day trial held in Texas.

Prosecutors charged the defendants in connection with a non-fatal shooting of a police officer that occurred on July 4 at the immigration facility in Alvarado, Texas. Authorities have said the defendants were dressed in black "military-style" clothing with head and face coverings when they carried out the attack on the facility.

The defendants have been described by the Trump administration as members of the antifa movement, which President Donald Trump designated last year as a domestic terrorist organization. Federal officials said the case is the first instance in which federal prosecutors filed terrorism charges specifically targeting antifa, a largely unstructured, far-left movement whose adherents broadly seek to confront those they view as authoritarian or racist.


Reactions from law enforcement and government officials were swift. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said after the verdict that this will not be the last case of its kind under the Trump administration. ICE Director Todd M. Lyons called the summer attack violent in nature and described it as "an abhorrent way for antifa terrorists to 'protest.'"

The nine individuals convicted are Cameron Arnold, Zachary Evetts, Benjamin Song, Savanna Batten, Bradford Morris, Maricela Rueda, Elizabeth Soto, Ines Soto and Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada.

Defense responses were limited immediately after the verdict. Lawyers for eight of the nine defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Cody Cofer, attorney for Arnold, who was described as the lead defendant, criticized the government's narrative and indicated plans to appeal.

"We are thankful that the jury could see through the Government's fear mongering antifa 'ambush' narrative," Cofer said. "We are afraid that our client's guilty verdicts for Riot and related charges resulted from a compromise during deliberations or failure to consider our client's individual conduct."

Cofer told reporters he intends to appeal the convictions. Beyond that, the Justice Department statement and media reports did not provide additional details about sentencing timelines or potential penalties for the convicted individuals.

The verdict closes the 12-day trial phase but, as officials and defense counsel have indicated, legal proceedings could continue through appeal. The case has drawn attention because federal prosecutors framed the actions as terrorism-related and because it represents an unusual use of terrorism statutes against alleged members of an anti-establishment movement.

Information released after the trial reflected the positions of both prosecutors and defense counsel, with prosecutors emphasizing the violent nature of the July 4 incident and defense counsel contesting the government's characterization of events and expressing concern about the jury's deliberations.

Risks

  • Defense counsel has signaled an intent to appeal, creating legal and timing uncertainty about final outcomes and sentencing - relevant to legal and corrections sectors.
  • Officials have stated this will not be the last such case under the current administration, indicating potential for additional prosecutions that could affect political risk and public safety expenditures.
  • Disagreement between prosecutors and defense about the nature of evidence and jury deliberations introduces uncertainty over how similar cases may be prosecuted and adjudicated in the future.

More from Politics

Republican Lawmakers Face Backlash After Multiple Anti-Muslim Posts Target New York Mayor Mar 13, 2026 Immigration Backlash Shapes Illinois Democratic Senate Primary Mar 13, 2026 OPM Reviews Cost and Scope of Federal Election Observer Program Targeting Racial Discrimination Mar 12, 2026 U.N. Committee Warns Trump Rhetoric on Migrants Could Fuel Discrimination and Violence Mar 11, 2026 California Officials Track Intelligence on Possible Iran-Linked Drone Strike Threat Mar 11, 2026