Using illegal methods to disrupt illegal activities is not legal. You can't shoot a guy to stop him running a red light. There are rules about Citizen's arrests, but they are pretty specific.
On the other hand, making a nuisance bid at an auction (especially when you are forthright about your actions, which he claims he was) doesn't seem like a serious criminal act.
> Using illegal methods to disrupt illegal activities is not legal
I don't know about the US but in the UK, it is a valid defence to say you were trying to prevent a greater crime. The textbook example is that you'd be allowed to steal a bicycle in order to prevent a murder. It's a defence quite commonly adopted by practitioners of civil disobedience, and there have been some notably successful uses of it.
As far as I'm aware, the closest US equivalent is jury nullification, which this guy apparently argued for. But the US government has waged a very effective PR campaign against jury nullification to the point where most people consider it immoral in all cases.
He did two illegal acts:
1. He misrepresented himself by saying that he was a legitimate buyer for the drilling rights.
2. He was unable to pay for the bids he won.
Both of which are pretty cut and dry fraud charges. Those are what he was found guilty for.
If he had just broken into the meeting and annoyed the people present, I would have a different opinion about his punishment, but what he did here was clearly illegal. If he's serious about this being a case of civil disobedience, he should accept the consequences of his actions. Trying to avoid the consequences just defeats the entire purpose.
> 1. He misrepresented himself by saying that he was a legitimate buyer for the drilling rights.
"The entire basis for the false statements charge that I was convicted of was the fact that I wrote my real name and address on a form that included the words “bona fide bidder.” When I sat there on the witness stand, Mr Romney asked me if I ever had any intention of being a bona fide bidder. I responded by asking Mr Romney to clarify what “bona fide bidder” meant in this context. Mr Romney then withdrew the question and moved on to the next subject. On that right there is the entire basis for the government’s repeated attacks on my integrity."
> 2. He was unable to pay for the bids he won.
"The other number suggested in the government’s memorandum is the $166,000 that was the total price of the three parcels I won which were not invalidated. Strangely, the government wants me to pay for these parcels, but has never offered to actually give them to me. When I offered the BLM the money a couple weeks after the auction, they refused to take it."
> If he's serious about this being a case of civil disobedience, he should accept the consequences of his actions. Trying to avoid the consequences just defeats the entire purpose.
"Despite my strong disagreements with the court about the Constitutional basis for the limits on my defense, while I was in this courtroom I respected the authority of the court. [...] disagreement with the law should not be confused with disrespect for the law."
It's really a very good speech, you should read it in its entirety.
On the other hand, making a nuisance bid at an auction (especially when you are forthright about your actions, which he claims he was) doesn't seem like a serious criminal act.