A Dallas man will spend 17 months in federal prison for threatening ICE agents online, the latest 2026 sentence tied to threats against federal officers.

Robert Wilson King, 36, received the prison term after pleading guilty to transmitting an interstate threat, Just the News reported. U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr imposed the sentence.

King pleaded guilty in June over several social-media posts threatening Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. He also suggested that someone kill President Donald Trump, according to the publication.

After prison, King must serve two years under federal supervision. His sentence joins three others imposed during 2026 for threats against federal agents.

The posts did not merely criticize immigration policy. King threatened to open fire if he saw ICE agents in his neighborhood and repeatedly urged others to shoot them.

King repeatedly escalated his threats against ICE agents

King claimed ICE agents lacked legal authority and called for them to be killed. He then announced that he was doubling and tripling down on those demands, Just the News reported.

The available account does not identify the platform used for each post or when King published them. It also does not state a motive for his conduct.

Those unknowns do not change the conduct described in his guilty plea. Political opposition to ICE does not grant anyone a license to threaten the agents who carry out federal law.

The case arrives as ICE agents face pressure on several fronts. One separate political fight involves a Massachusetts ICE bill that would let illegal immigrants sue agents personally.

U.S. Attorney Ryan Raybould drew a clear distinction between political speech and threats. As Just the News reported, Raybould said federal law enforcement personnel should not fear for their families because of their work.

“There is no place for political violence in this country, and that includes hiding behind a keyboard to threaten the lives of the men and women who serve in federal law enforcement. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents perform critical duties for our nation, and they should never have to fear for their own lives or the safety of their families simply for doing their jobs.”

Raybould also warned that federal authorities would find and prosecute people who intimidate, harass or threaten federal officials. That promise carries weight only when prosecutors follow through.

Four federal sentences in 2026 show threats carry consequences

King’s case was one of four 2026 sentences described by Just the News. The punishments ranged from six months to 21 months in federal prison.

Logan Christopher Murfin, 26, of Oklahoma received the longest term. A jury found him guilty in April, and U.S. District Judge Gregory K. Frizzell sentenced him in August to 21 months in prison.

Murfin also received two years of supervised release. Jurors convicted him on five counts of threatening to assault and murder federal officers and five interstate-threat counts.

An October 2025 Homeland Security Investigations report contained several posts from Murfin discussing the shooting of ICE agents. The account identified the platform as X but did not provide his account details.

The debate surrounding ICE has also produced claims about election enforcement. Tom Homan separately addressed polling-place allegations before the midterms.

Christopher Ray Plyler, 43, of Michigan received 12 months for threats. Joseph Rocco Giancola, 73, of Florida received six months.

The cases differ in their details and punishments. Together, they show federal prosecutors treating online calls to kill officers as crimes rather than dismissing them as angry posts.

Federal law protects debate but does not excuse criminal threats

The legal line between protected speech and a criminal threat has long demanded careful judgment. Just the News noted that threatening the president became a federal crime in 1917.

Congress later enacted penalties covering threats against other federal officials and employees, including through the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.

The Supreme Court confronted the speech question in the 1969 case Watts v. United States. The justices considered whether a statement about getting President L.B.J. “in my sights” was a credible threat or protected political hyperbole.

King’s guilty plea ended that question in his own prosecution. He admitted transmitting an interstate threat, and Judge Starr imposed prison time plus supervision after release.

Homeland Security Investigations official Antwoine Jones said threats against federal officers are not protected speech. He called such conduct a criminal act that authorities would investigate seriously.

Jones said the sentence should warn anyone who tries to threaten officers or intimidate them from performing their lawful duties. Accountability matters most when political anger turns into direct threats.

ICE continues to handle politically charged cases beyond immigration arrests, including an illegal-voting case. Disputes over the agency’s mission remain lawful; threats against its personnel do not.

A country governed by law can protect fierce debate without excusing threats against the men and women assigned to enforce that law.