A federal appeals court on Wednesday reportedly unanimously overturned the conviction of Douglass Mackey, known online as “Ricky Vaughn,” a pro-Trump influencer once sentenced to seven months in prison for spreading false memes during the 2016 election.
The decision marked a significant rebuke of the Biden-era Department of Justice’s prosecution strategy, focusing scrutiny on how far the line of lawful political expression extends.
Mackey was convicted in March 2023 by a Brooklyn jury that found he had conspired to suppress votes for Hillary Clinton by circulating satirical memes joking that supporters could “vote from home” via a text message.
Liberal prosecutors tried to claim that the memes, amplified in Black American–focused messaging and Spanish-language posts, misled nearly 5,000 individuals and amounted to criminal election interference.
However, in a sharply worded opinion, a three‑judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that the government had not provided sufficient evidence that Mackey knowingly engaged in a conspiracy to deprive citizens of the right to vote.
Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston wrote that while Mackey’s actions might have been “intended to support Trump,” that did not equate to entering an illegal agreement with co-conspirators.
There was no proof he had read or participated in the private Twitter group chats that prosecutors said had orchestrated the effort.
“The mere fact that Mackey posted the memes, even assuming intent to influence voters, is not enough to prove a criminal conspiracy,” the court ruled. All three judges agreed, and the conviction was vacated alongside Mackey’s sentence. The case was remanded for the district court to issue a judgment of acquittal.
Mackey, who had remained out on bail pending appeal, celebrated the ruling with enthusiasm on social media. In an X post, he declared: “THE CASE HAS BEEN REMANDED… HALLELUJAH!”
He suggested he may sue the government for what he described as political targeting by the Biden administration, noting that charges were filed nearly four years after the offending tweets were published.
Legal observers say the decision underscores a crucial distinction: while political speech—even false or misleading—may be distasteful, it is protected under the First Amendment unless it crosses into direct, coordinated action to sway elections.
The ruling sets a precedent limiting prosecutorial authority in cases involving online content and disinformation.
Supporters of the original prosecution argue that false claims aimed at suppressing turnout pose a serious threat to democratic integrity.
But the appeals court emphasized that labeling speech as improper does not make it criminal—especially without evidence of criminal intent or agreement.
With the acquittal now secured, Mackey is free from legal jeopardy and may pursue claims against the government.
Meanwhile, the ruling sends a message to both political activists and federal prosecutors: the boundary between misinformation and criminal conduct remains narrow.
[READ MORE: Stacey Abrams Claims Trump Will Soon Turn America Into an Autocracy]
