An Austin jury cleared all but one of six Donald Trump supporters who were accused of breaking federal law when they surrounded a Joe Biden campaign bus driving down a Texas highway days before the 2020 election.
The seven-person jury, which deliberated for most of Monday, said just one of the defendants, Eliazar Cisneros, violated the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 when the so-called Trump Train — a monicker for caravans to show support for the former president — drove up to the bus as it traveled north on Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Austin on Oct. 30, 2020. The group, which included dozens of vehicles on the highway that day, forced the bus to slow to a crawl.
Cisneros was ordered to pay $30,000 in punitive damages to the plaintiffs and $10,000 in compensatory damages to the bus driver, Timothy Holloway. Cisneros’ lawyer asked the judge to throw out the decision after it was announced. If the judge rules against Cisneros, he can appeal the jury’s decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Both plaintiffs and defendants claimed Monday’s verdict as a victory.
[…]
“Each of us really had one interest at heart, and that was making sure that in elections going forward, people will understand that it is not acceptable to intimidate, harass and threaten people who want nothing more than to express their right to support the candidate of their choice,” said former state Sen. Wendy Davis, who was one of the plaintiffs.
Christina Beeler, a lawyer for the Texas Civil Rights Project, which helped represent the plaintiffs, said they were pleased the jury awarded punitive damages, which sends “a message to the public that threats, intimidation and violence have no place in American elections.”
“Today’s verdict is a win for our clients, and it’s a win for American democracy,” she added.
See here for the previous update. That was a pretty quick verdict, so I’d guess it wasn’t terribly contentious. I would of course have liked to have seen all of the defendants be held liable, but at least they didn’t all get away with it. Now I would like to see some respected legal analysts take a look and this case and tell me if they think this verdict was good, bad, or indifferent. I mean, I do recognize that a lawsuit based on a Reconstruction law may be a bit of a stretch; surely, we have no muscle memory for that sort of thing. But I’m not the expert, and that’s why I’d love to hear from some of them. A full statement from the plaintiffs is beneath the fold, and Reform Austin has more.
A federal jury in Texas today found the lead organizer in the Texas “Trump Train” trial liable for using threats and intimidation to prevent plaintiffs Wendy Davis, David Gins, and Timothy Holloway from engaging in support or advocacy of a political candidate in violation of state and federal law, including the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act. The ruling was a major victory for American civil rights, reaffirming that all citizens are protected against politically motivated threats, intimidation, and force. The jury held Eliazar Cisneros, a lead organizer of the ‘Trump Train,’ liable under the KKK Act and awarded $10,000 in compensatory damages to plaintiff Timothy Holloway and $30,000 in punitive damages to all three plaintiffs.
The civil lawsuit was brought by Protect Democracy, the Texas Civil Rights Project, and Willkie Farr & Gallagher on behalf of Ms. Davis, a former Texas state senator; Mr. Gins, who was then a Biden-Harris campaign staffer, and Mr. Holloway, a bus driver. The plaintiffs were driving in a Biden-Harris campaign bus down I-35 between San Antonio and Austin when they were ambushed by a self-described “Trump Train,” a group that included defendants Eliazar Cisneros, Randi Ceh, Steven Ceh, Joeylynn Mesaros, Robert Mesaros, and Dolores Park. For more than an hour, dozens of trucks and cars encircled the campaign bus, coordinating to threaten, harass, and intimidate those aboard. Some participants live-streamed their reckless driving, and one of their vehicles ultimately collided with a campaign vehicle.
“A democracy necessarily relies on the freedom to support our candidates of choice, no matter how much we might disagree,” said Wendy Davis, plaintiff and former Texas State Senator. “It also depends on our ability to seek redress when those freedoms are inhibited through force, threat, and intimidation. I am deeply grateful to the jury for their decision today. It’s one that will send a strong signal to others that forceful threats and intimidation that seek to silence our voices in elections will not be tolerated.”
“Today’s victory sends a strong message that in our democracy every individual has the right to express their support for a political candidate without the fear that they will be threatened for doing so,” said David Gins, plaintiff and former Biden campaign staffer. “Especially ahead of an election when divisions are heightened and tensions run high, the rule of law still applies and anyone who engages in acts of political intimidation or violence will be held accountable.”
“I’m relieved to put this whole case behind me,” said Tim Holloway, plaintiff and bus driver. “I can appreciate that people have strong opinions, but we have to be able to express our views peacefully. Today’s verdict is a very good outcome. I hope this case discourages people from doing things in the name of politics that endanger lives, and I’m glad that there are legal consequences for perpetrators of threats and intimidation.”
“Today’s ruling affirms the right of every individual in this country to voice their political beliefs without fear that they will be threatened or injured just for exercising their right to participate in our democracy,” said John Paredes, a litigator for Protect Democracy who serves as co-counsel on the case. “It is especially significant in today’s climate of heightened political tension, and sends a strong signal to all Americans that anyone who engages in acts of political intimidation or violence in this upcoming election or any other election will be held accountable.”
“It takes an extraordinary amount of courage to be a plaintiff in such a public civil rights case,” said Christina Beeler, Senior Supervising Attorney at Texas Civil Rights Project who serves as co-counsel on the case. “Nothing can change what Wendy, David, and Tim experienced on that campaign bus four years ago, but as a result of their courage, our democracy is stronger and more resilient. This verdict affirms and reinforces that every American has the fundamental right to participate in the democratic process and to support the candidates of their choosing free from election-related intimidation or violence.
“We invoked the Klan Act of 1871 to reaffirm that threats, intimidation, and force have absolutely no place in American politics — not in 1871, not in 1971, not in 2020, and certainly not today,” said Samuel Hall, Partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP who serves as co-counsel on the case. “For decades, the statute fell into disuse, but it has come back into use over the past several years because of our current climate of heightened political polarization and extremism. People who support Harris, Trump, or neither all enjoy the same protections under the law. The foundation of democracy is fragile, and we must be vigilant in guarding it.”
The jury found defendant Eliazar Cisneros liable under the Klan Act and awarded plaintiffs a total of $40,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. The jury did not find any other defendants liable.
Congress passed the Klan Act in 1871 to put an end to the terror organization’s coordinated attacks on newly emancipated citizens. Among its many important civil rights protections, the Act allows individuals to sue for damages in federal court “if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice President.”
A second complaint, Cervini v. Stapp, was filed by the Plaintiffs against law enforcement officials who turned a blind eye to the highway attack and failed to provide the campaign bus a police escort. On Oct. 18, 2023, the city of San Marcos, Texas, and three of its police officials settled the case. The settlement agreement included an admission that local law enforcement fell short of its policing standards, an agreement to institute mandatory training for all officers, and compensations for the victims whom the police failed to protect.