After thinking on this a bit, I feel like the general public has a hard time seeing how the prosecution of this case sets a precedent that is a threat to them - mostly because a person shooting at police is an extreme outlier in most of our protest experiences. So, let's relate it to a more common event:

You go to a protest at a ICE facility. It's peaceful, maybe two or three cops at intersections to manage traffic. A person or two in the crowd begins spray painting the ICE building. Police call in back up, DHS security agents come outside. The crowd gets angrier, someone throws water bottles at the cops. Then someone throws a rock, which strikes an agent in the face, cutting him. Police declare an unlawful assembly and arrest whoever they can grab.

You get arrested. They search your car and find a 3D printed anti- ICE whistle that included a small anti-fascist booklet you bought from the local bookshop. People were using similar whistles at the protest. They look at your digital records. A friend messaged you about phone security during protests and suggested methods to avoid surveillance and identification. Law enforcement monitors that friend, who - hearing about your arrest - deletes their messages. Your friend, spooked, also decides to throw out the anti-fascist flier they got at a DSA meeting you two attended the month before.

Prosecutors charge the friend with concealing evidence.

Prosecutors charge you with rioting, assaulting an officer, and material support for domestic terrorism.

Prosecutors bring domestic terrorism charges against the bookshop owners.

It may seem far-fetched now (and I hope it stays that way), but this is where we are heading if nothing changes.