Court rules for Trump supporters who allege police allowed them to be attacked

A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that plaintiffs can move ahead with a lawsuit against the San Jose Police Department, alleging police failed to protect Donald Trump supporters from attackers when attending a June 2016 San Jose Trump campaign rally at the McEnery Convention Center.

According to the lawsuit, which contains 20 plaintiffs seeking damages, some Trump supporters suffered broken noses from punches being thrown at them, while another suffered head trauma when he was hit in the head with a bag of rocks. Others had their glasses broken and hair pulled, and some were harassed when anti-Trump protestors threw eggs. A video of a woman being egged was posted by Fox News after the event.

The suit, however, targets the San Jose Police Department, whom the suit alleges did not intervene.

“Instead of stopping the attacks… several (police) officers and other city personnel, including members of the San Jose Fire Department, refused to respond to pleas for help from several of the Trump supporters,” the suit says. “Several officers told Trump supporters that the police were not permitted to provide assistance to those trying to return to their vehicles and leave the area.”

The lawsuit also claims that police knowingly ordered the Trump rally attenders to leave the convention center through a single exit where protesters were waiting, despite the existence of a safer route.

“No citizen should have to feel that he is risking life and limb to attend a political event, or feel that his or her rights are somehow less important just because they happen to be different than those of the mayor and/or the chief of police,” Harmeet Dhillon, attorney for the plaintiffs said in a statement.

The 3-0 ruling for the plaintiffs by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco states, “The attendees alleged sufficiently that the officers increased the danger to them by shepherding them into a crowd of violent protesters and that the officers acted with deliberate indifference to that danger. The district court therefore correctly denied the officers qualified immunity.”

The ruling will give the plaintiffs a day in court to prove the allegation, which if true, violated the constitutional rights of the Trump supporters.

While sadly it is unsurprising to hear of violent protests in today’s political climate, it is shocking to hear allegations of police cooperation and enhancement of such violence.



  1. Christine Gavlick says


    1. Robert Davis says

      I have always been very supportive of law enforcement, however, it seems that where anything or anyone related to President Trump, that involves assaults, attacks, vandalism, the perpetrators get a pass to do just as they please. Law enforcement has been directed to stands down and allow these things to occur. Folks have been really physically damaged as well as property with not law enforcement intervention. It seems that the only recourse for folks these days is to sue civilly or otherwise the cities, counties and or states to the fullest extent the courts systems will allow – which is as much as the juries will attach to each case. It seems, only then can individuals be recompensed for injury and loss.

  2. Donald Schmidt says

    It sure looked like police allowed the attacks to me. The city Leaders of San Jose and any other city that allowed such abuse should be fined or lose their Federal money for police. ICE should pay very close attention to these cities!

  3. Rich says

    Don’t blame law enforcement overall. California is another world, still its not a valid excuse or reason for what the police did or did not do. For any community to be able to organize their police department and fire department, not to mention their courts and their judges, is vile and disgraceful. Now that this action is taking place, brings us closer and closer to all out war among citizens. In other words, this police force really encouraged incivility and unrest by their inactions when they chose sides and failed to do their jobs protect. What did they accomplish and who did they impress? Next they’ll be giving MS-13 gang members badges!

    1. John says


  4. Doug says

    I hope that get tens of millions of dollars… bankrupt the anarchists.

  5. Patti says

    I’ve been in the position where I was followed around in Walmart (enough to catch the attention of security), had to be walked out to my vehicle and on my way home this same person was pulling up beside me on a 2-lane road, trying to urge me to pull over. I called the Sheriff’s Dept. since I’d just left the city limits and was about 2 miles from home, and told them what was going on. The guy said, ‘What do you expect us to do about it?’ I said, ‘How about your job?’ I told him that I was driving a much larger vehicle and if the guy tried again to run me off the road, I would do that to him. He urged me ‘not to do that.’ I told him who I was and he said, ‘I’m aware of who you are.’ OMG!! I made it home but it was then I realized that I’m pretty much on my own. I had protection, too, but still… you can bet if I’d defended myself, they would’ve most likely locked ME up!

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You might also like