In the civil trial, the jury determined that only one out of the six individuals supporting former U.S. President Trump was responsible for subjecting Biden's campaign bus to harassment back in 2020.
This month in the Austin, Texas, US District Court, a trial replayed for the jury the occurrences surrounding a October 2020 "Trump Rally" - a convoy of vehicles driven by Trump supporters that slowed down the Biden-Harris campaign bus to a snail's pace. As per the final verdict form, the bus driver was awarded $10,000.
The "Trump Rally" also resulted in damages to a Biden campaign staffer's SUV after one of the Trump supporters side-swiped it, according to court documents. This Trump supporter, Eliazar Cisneros, was found responsible for violating a federal civil rights conspiracy. As punishment, the jury fined him $30,000.
Besides his actions in Texas, Cisneros testified that he helped to bring batons and bear spray to the January 6 Capitol riot in Washington, allegedly to safeguard against leftist groups Antifa and Black Lives Matter. In a deposition, he also admitted to driving his truck into a crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters in September 2020 in San Antonio, "just to make a statement," according to court documents.
The jury did not find any of the other five defendants from the "Trump Rally" liable. None of the six are facing any criminal charges.
The plaintiffs in this case include the bus driver, a campaign state director, and Wendy Davis, a former Texas state senator who was on the Biden-Harris bus as a political surrogate and testified about the distress of the incident.
The plaintiffs' lawyers presented the jury with flyers the group distributed and conversations they had about hindering the Biden bus before their trucks encircled it while waving Trump flags. The jury also listened to 911 calls from bystanders who were frightened of potential automobile accidents due to the caravan.
This case represents one of the few instances where Trump supporters' behavior has gone to a civil trial under a post-Civil War law generally known as the "Ku Klux Klan Act," which aims to protect individuals engaged in politics from harassment or even assault.
The case, from the judge's in-depth rulings to the jury's verdict, and despite its mixed result, could serve as a guide for courts in the future assessing KKK Act claims, particularly in challenges seeking to penalize Trump supporters, according to sources familiar with the Texas case.
The jury focused on the facts of the case, and earlier, a federal judge decided that the allegations of "Trump Rally" harassment could be deemed serious political intimidation under federal law.
"Despite the methods of political intimidation evolving over time and requiring adaptation of the Klan Act to new circumstances, the conduct alleged here requires no such adaptation; the Defendants' alleged conduct is similar to a type of political violence that the Klan engaged in at the time of the Act’s enactment," Judge Robert Pitman of the US District Court in Western Texas wrote in August.
The defendants claimed they never intended to intimidate or threaten the Biden-Harris campaign and were participating in their own peaceful protest for Trump, which they believed was protected speech.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
The political nature of the events was evident, as the "Trump Rally" and its associated actions were closely tied to the 2020 election campaigns. The trial in Austin, Texas, under the "Ku Klux Klan Act" highlighted the importance of protecting individuals engaged in politics from harassment or assault.
