BRETT TOLMAN: Mountain runner facing prison for using trail bureaucrats secretly deemed off-limits
Picture this: you lace up your shoes, take a breath of fresh mountain air, and hit the trail in the Grand Tetons National Park. You complete a legendary speed record in the world of ultra-running, and fellow runners are celebrating you. Then, you're slapped with a federal crime.
Sounds like a joke, right? Sadly, it's real—and it's happening now to Michelino Sunseri, a 32-year-old bartender and record-setting mountain runner.
Sunseri ran a trail that hundreds if not thousands before him had done: he took a well-worn trail, one that's been used for decades by hikers, climbers, and runners alike. There was no gate. No park ranger stopping people. Just a tiny sign about "erosion" half-hidden in the sagebrush. But that was enough for the National Park Service to charge him with a federal crime.
Now, Sunseri is looking at up to $5,000 in fines, a possible six months in federal prison, and worst of all—a permanent criminal record. To add insult to injury, he could also be banned from the Grand Tetons National Park, the mountains he loves, for the next five years.
This isn't justice. This is overcriminalization.
Sunseri should not be a criminal. He didn't vandalize or hurt anyone. He ran a trail. He did not damage the trail, and he was open about it. He posted his record-breaking run on a digital app, and that's when government bureaucrats decided to make an example of him.
When federal bureaucrats act as lawmaker, judge, and jury, there's little any of us can do. As a former federal prosecutor, I can tell you that the Department of Justice wins 90% of its cases. And too often, there is no common sense, no grace, no understanding. Just raw, unchecked power.
And here's the truth: it can happen to you.
When the government creates a maze of vague rules and hidden signs and then prosecutes people who violate them without knowing and without intent, it's not justice. It's about power and control.
Sunseri's case is a warning to all of us. It shows what happens when Americans are expected to follow rules they can't even see. No one in the entire federal government keeps track of them all, but we estimate there are more than 300,000 federal statutes and regulations that carry federal criminal penalties.
And remember, once convicted of a federal crime there is no expungement of your record. Even if you're pardoned, your criminal record follows you for a lifetime and prevents opportunities for housing, education and employment.
Sunseri's case isn't about a trail. It's about the growing divide between everyday citizens and an out-of-touch bureaucracy that thinks it knows best. It's about the erosion of liberty in the name of government authority.
We cannot sit back and let this continue. Government overreach is real, and this case is Exhibit A. We need laws written by elected lawmakers—not unaccountable federal agencies. We need clarity, not hidden signs and gotcha rules. And above all, we need a justice system that remembers the difference between a criminal—and a man who just loves to run in the mountains where he lives.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
35 minutes ago
- Washington Post
A parking structure is on fire in downtown Nashville
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A fire broke out in a parking structure of Nashville's main public library early Tuesday, sending a large plume of smoke into the air downtown. A nearby witness heard explosions from the structure but there were no immediate reports of injuries. Eli Gilmore, a Nashville musician who lives in the apartment building next door, said he heard loud explosions begin around 1:15 a.m.
Washington Post
39 minutes ago
- Washington Post
One killed, six hurt in three daylight shootings, D.C. police say
A man was killed and six other people wounded Monday in three daylight shootings in the District, police said. The slaying was the city's third in two days. Monday's killing came during an outbreak of gunfire around noon outside a store on busy Mount Olivet Road NE, Executive Assistant Police Chief Andre Wright said. He gave no information about any specific motive in that or the other two shootings, which all occurred within a two-hour span. But, based on Wright's account, the incident on Mount Olivet resembled a targeted shooting. Three men were standing outside the store in the 1200 block of Mount Olivet, Wright said, when a black sedan pulled up and three men got out. All were dressed in black, he said. They fired at the men in front of the store, he said. Then they got back into the sedan and left. In addition to the man who was killed, the two other men who had been outside the store were both hit. They were taken to hospitals. A woman who later sought hospital treatment was thought by police to have been a fourth person hit in the same incident. Community concern about the attack was understandable, Wright said. But he pledged 'to get to the bottom of this.' Homicides in the District have evoked concerns not only in the city's neighborhoods, but also among federal officials. The level of homicides in D.C. this year is about the same as last year at this time. However, the level of all violent crime this year is substantially less than last year's, according to police statistics. Before Monday's quadruple shooting on Mount Olivet, Wright said, one man was shot around 10 a.m. in the 1700 block of Benning Road NE, and two men were shot about an hour and a half after that, about two blocks away, in the 1500 block of Benning. It was not immediately known whether any of the shootings was connected. But Tom Lynch, a police spokesman, said Monday night that investigators suspected two of them may be linked: the Mount Olivet Road shooting and the second of the Benning Road shootings. All of the three sites are within a mile of each other. At a news briefing on the three incidents, Wright indicated that police viewed personal disputes as underlying many shootings in the District. 'You still have people in the community who fail to understand how to resolve conflicts,' he said, and 'in the heat of argument, 'they introduce a firearm.' On Sunday, in the first of the day's two homicides, Jonathan Fuentes-Ferrufino, 27, of Northwest was found fatally stabbed about 12:30 a.m. in the 4100 block of 7th Street NW, police said, and an arrest was made. In the second, Brandon Tolson, 21, of Northeast was fatally shot just before 3 a.m. in the 1400 block of S Street NW, police said.
New York Times
39 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Pardon Power Is Helping Trump Realize His Dreams
More than any previous president, Donald Trump has systematically deployed his authority to grant pardons to reward loyalists, assure appointees and associates that they can violate the law with impunity and reduce prosecutorial pressure on allies to testify against him. Legal scholars are outspoken in their criticism of Trump's use of the pardon power. Rachel Barkow, a law professor at N.Y.U., described Trump's goals by email: The use of the pardon power is part of his effort to put the country on an authoritarian path. Instead of administering the pardon power evenhandedly with a regular process that is available equally to all, he is rewarding his partisan allies. It is the carrot for supporters, and he uses the stick of weaponizing prosecutions and investigations against his partisan enemies. Of the more than 1,600 pardons and commutations Trump has issued, only a tiny fraction fit the traditional purpose of addressing a miscarriage of justice, excessive sentencing for nonviolent crimes and prosecutorial overreach. Trump, Barkow wrote, is clearly sending a message that he will support people who support him — that's why Ed Martin, the current pardon attorney, tweeted 'No MAGA left behind.' Trump is trying to create a narrative that prosecutors are unfairly weaponizing the law by targeting people with financial fraud and corruption charges, which is what he says happened to him. In the vast majority of cases so far, Trump granted pardons to those who have committed crimes in support of his claim that the 2020 election was stolen — the Jan. 6 insurrectionists — and to a smaller number of those convicted of the kind of crimes Democrats accuse the president of committing, especially bribery and financial fraud. Frank Bowman III, a law professor emeritus at the University of Missouri and former special counsel to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, argued in an email that: No president before Trump has simply abandoned the principle that pardons are to be used for the public good, either to achieve just outcomes in individual cases, to remedy defects in criminal justice policy, or to heal the wounds of domestic unrest or civil or foreign wars by extending mercy to the defeated or forgiveness to those who broke the law in opposing the nation's will. Bowman shares Barkow's view that Trump is intent on acquiring authoritarian powers: 'Trump's abuses of the pardon power are merely one component of an integrated program of destroying legal constraints on Trump's drive for absolute political power and even greater personal wealth.' In an essay published in Slate in April, 'The Biggest Political Scandal of Trump's Term Has Gone Completely Ignored,' Bowman argued that Trump's twin ambitions are to be a dictator and to become ever more fabulously wealthy. Thus, in addition to using state power to crush his perceived enemies, he wants to be able to accept or extort political favors, both monetary and intangible, that keep him in office and centralize authority in his person. As part of this strategy, Bowman continued, Trump is now openly deploying pardons as a reward for political favors — huge financial contributions in the case of Trevor Milton, and questionable testimony against political enemies in the cases of Jason Galanis and Devon Archer. These cases, in Bowman's view, should be understood as merely one component of a coordinated effort to neuter both criminal and civil mechanisms for detecting, regulating, and punishing financial crime and public corruption — or at least financial crime and public corruption committed by Trump and his allies. Bowman wrote in his email that Trump's pardons generally fit into the following categories: Pardons 'dangled,' to use the phrase from Watergate, and later awarded, to associates who could implicate Trump in conduct either impeachable or criminally prosecutable. This class of pardons was employed at the end of Trump I and included pardons to Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn. Pardons to Trump's violent supporters from Jan. 6. Pardons granted as rewards either for financial contributions to Trump or his political operations or for political support of other kinds by the defendant or his family. 'Pre-emptive self-exoneration' or 'refining criminality pardons: Trump has issued multiple pardons to defendants convicted of bribery and high-value financial crimes, notably fraud and crypto. When explanations are forthcoming, they tend to be either that the defendants were railroaded by deep state liberal prosecutors or that the crimes were not so much crimes as technical violations of excessive government constraints on benign business practices. Many of the law professors I contacted for this column cited two other hallmarks of Trump's pardons. First, many of the crimes that Trump expunges are similar to the crimes Democrats accuse him of. Second, Trump is signaling through his pardons that appointees who break the law in furtherance of his agenda will themselves be pardoned if indicted and convicted — or to forestall indictments in the first place. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
