[Editor’s note: At 6:56 PM, EST, Donald Trump announced that he pardoned Ulbricht. Trump described the federal prosecutors and law enforcement behind the Ulbricht conviction as “scum” and “lunatics.” Trump also described Ulbricht’s excessive sentence as “ridiculous.”]
Imagine being sentenced to die in prison because you created a website. This is the fate of Ross Ulbricht. While Ulbricht is currently serving his twelfth year in prison, he may (fortunately) acquire freedom once again very soon. “On day one, I will commute the sentence of Ross Ulbricht,” claimed Donald Trump amidst cheers from the audience of the 2024 Libertarian National Convention. On October 31, 2024, Trump included “#FreeRossDayOne” in a pro-Bitcoin post he wrote on X. Subsequently, Ulbricht wrote on X that he not only trusted Trump to honor the pledge, but even added that he can “finally see the light of freedom at the end of the tunnel.” January 20, 2025 has passed. In the days leading up to Trump’s inauguration, many around the United States and the world at large, including myself, wondered whether Trump would actually fulfill his promise and free Ulbricht, either on his first day in office or even in general.
Ten years ago this month, the jury trial for Ulbricht, the creator of a major dark web marketplace named the Silk Road, began. In February 2015, Ulbricht was convicted of charges that included money laundering, selling narcotics, maintaining an “ongoing criminal enterprise,” and more. Ulbricht, a first-time offender, was eventually sentenced to two life sentences plus forty years without the chance of parole. What likely compelled former US District Judge Katherine Forrest to deliver the brutal sentence was Ulbricht’s libertarian outlook, which she ignorantly criticized as “deeply troubling, terribly misguided, and very dangerous.”
Several components of Ulbricht’s case raise further suspicions, including the FBI locating the Silk Road’s servers without a warrant, Ulbricht being prevented from calling witnesses, major drug dealers on the Silk Road receiving much more lenient sentences, dubious murder-for-hire allegations (which were later dropped), two former federal agents later being convicted of stealing Bitcoin, and so on. Ulbricht’s punishment is not only exceedingly harsh, but also represents a substantial attack against freedom and justice everywhere. Trump’s current commitment to pardoning Ulbricht was undoubtedly the product of hearing about the troubling components of Ulbricht’s case from people such as Angela McArdle and Vivek Ramaswamy.
However, Trump’s record partly sheds a negative light on the possibility that Ulbricht will actually be freed. For instance, during his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly endorsed the death penalty for drug dealers. These statements seemingly contradict Trump’s commitment to free Ulbricht, who helped organize a major drug marketplace on the dark web. Further, why didn’t Trump free Ulbricht during his first term? At the end of his first term, Trump was considering freeing Ulbricht, but ultimately decided not to.
In general, Trump’s first term was marked by an habitual inability to fulfill certain desired actions. For instance, Trump promised that he would release the JFK files in 2017. Soon after, Trump succumbed to pressure (from individuals such as neoconservative Mike Pompeo) and decided to not release the JFK files, citing national security reasons. Similar to his current pledge to Ulbricht, Trump has again committed to releasing the JFK files. Since he didn’t fulfill his promise during his first term, why should we trust Trump this time around?
In addition, Trump succumbed to pressure and neither pardoned Julian Assange nor Edward Snowden during his first term. In a 2021 interview with Candace Owens, Trump stated that he was close to freeing either Assange or Snowden at the end of his first term, although he was likely closer to pardoning Snowden because he felt more strongly about him. According to Glenn Greenwald, not only did individuals such as Pompeo (who previously contemplated assassinating Assange) pressure Trump, but neoconservatives in Congress also utilized the impeachment trial to pressure Trump from freeing either Assange or Snowden. Since Trump habitually yielded to pressure during his first term, it’s safe to assume that Trump’s ability to fulfill promises is on the weaker side. Consequently, this means that Trump cannot be fully trusted to honor his pledge and commute the sentence of Ulbricht, certainly not only on day one, but also in general.
Nonetheless, Trump simultaneously made some decisions during his first term which shed a positive light on the possibility that he’ll actually free Ulbricht. Notwithstanding Trump’s current endorsement of the death penalty for drug dealers, Trump granted clemency to Alice Marie Johnson in 2018, who was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole due to her alleged role in cocaine trafficking. Moreover, Trump signed the First Step Act in 2018, which intended to reduce exceedingly long federal sentences and improve prison conditions. The implementation of these decisions represented an attack against exceedingly harsh punishments for drug crimes, and it’s very possible that Trump may extend these policies by freeing Ulbricht.
As previously mentioned, pressure largely contributed to Trump not fulfilling certain promises and desired actions during his first term. Because of both the high likelihood that pressure will be largely absent and some of the decisions that Trump made during his first term, I do believe that Trump will free Ulbricht. Unfortunately, however, I don’t believe that Trump will free Ulbricht on day one. During his presidential campaign, Trump made various promises that he said would be achieved during his first day in office, including ending the war in Ukraine, securing the border, pardoning all January 6 rioters, and much more. It’s impossible for Trump to fulfill every one of these promises during his first day in office. It’s more likely that Trump’s hands will be tied.
Toward the end of the first series of Economic Sophisms, French economist Frédéric Bastiat asked rhetorically, “...what can be more injurious to a good cause than that it should be at the same time vigorously attacked and feebly defended?” Advocating for Ulbricht’s cause is part of the continuous fight for freedom and justice. Failing to fully defend Ulbricht by not freeing him would not only forever stain Trump’s legacy, but would also have devastating effects to the movement advocating for Ulbricht’s clemency by obliterating the hope of many involved.
