NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Louisiana parish officials who threatened to arrest and imprison an environmental activist as she attempted to speak during a public meeting did not violate her right to freedom of speech, a unanimous civil jury ruled Wednesday.

Joy Banner had sought more than $2 million in damages from two St. John the Baptist parish officials — Parish President Jaclyn Hotard and councilmember Michael Wright — who she said blocked her from raising allegations of corruption tied to industrial development at a public meeting. While Banner’s attorneys said the case had important implications for protecting outspoken citizens from government censorship, lawyers representing the parish said they were model officials trying to curtail disruption and keep the meeting on track.

The case is part of a broader series of disputes playing out in courts and public hearings between grassroots community groups and Louisiana officials over industrial expansion in the 85-mile (136-kilometer) chemical corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans, often referred to by environmental activists as “Cancer Alley” because of its high pollution levels.

Banner, co-founder of the environmental and racial justice organization The Descendants Project, gained a national reputation fighting against an $800 million grain terminal slated for her predominantly Black community in St. John the Baptist parish. The project was later aborted.

In a November 2023 parish council meeting, Banner sought to oppose an agenda item introduced by Hotard to use taxpayer funds for a lawyer to defend parish officials from ethics complaints. The state ethics board had launched an investigation after Banner filed a complaint pointing out that Hotard’s mother-in-law, Darla Gaudet, owned a marine transport company that owned land near the proposed site for the grain terminal.

As Banner began to discuss these concerns during the public comment period, councilmember Michael Wright repeatedly banged his gavel and both he and Hotard told Banner she was not speaking on topic as she made her remarks.

Wright then quoted from an obsolete law under which anyone who publicly shared testimony given to a state ethics board investigation could be subject to one year of imprisonment. A federal judge deemed the law unconstitutional years ago.

“When I heard the words imprisonment and misdemeanor, I thought, ‘That’s it, I’m going to jail, I’ve messed everything up, my business is going to be ruined, my name is going to be ruined.’ I was terrified and shocked,” Banner later testified.

Ike Spears, the parish officials’ attorney, noted that they had also interrupted and instructed to stay on topic other members of the public who spoke during the public comment period. He described Banner as a “disruptive citizen” striving to become a “social media influencer” and garner media attention from the litigation.

“She wants us to reward this conduct with $2 million plus,” Spears told jurors.

Banner’s attorney William Most countered that her intended comments at the public meeting were “vital” to informing the parish about Hotard’s potential conflicts of interest.

“Joy Banner was treated differently than anyone else: She was the only person threatened with arrest and she was also the only one to raise the issue of Hotard’s family business interests,” Most said. “She was directly on topic.”

Hotard also used vitriolic language to describe Banner, including fantasizing about strangling her, in text messages to her mother-in-law that were introduced as evidence. Most said the messages indicated that Hotard had a personal motivation to shut down Banner’s participation in a public meeting.

The state ethics board ruled last year that Hotard had not violated state ethics laws.

Yet Hotard’s mother-in-law later revealed during a deposition for Banner’s lawsuit that Hotard’s husband is a beneficiary of a trust that owned land overlapping with the planned railroad route leading into the proposed grain terminal.

Spears acknowledged that Hotard would “probably” personally benefit from the grain terminal’s approval. But he said increased tax revenue and good-paying jobs were the parish president’s driving motivation in supporting the project.

Hotard, who was not present for the verdict, did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

The jury sent a “strong message against frivolous lawsuits,” Wright said in an emailed statement to The Associated Press. “This is a significant victory for St. John Parish and a promising sign for businesses and industries considering the River Parishes as their home.”

Juror Cam Owen said he was ready to vote in Banner’s favor following closing arguments. He changed his mind — and came to tears during deliberations — after closely reviewing the facts and video footage of the public meeting, which he described as the “deciding factor” for the jury. Owen said jurors calculated the amount of time Banner was able to speak and concluded she was able to express most of her viewpoint.

“At the end of the day, you know, they did try to stop her, but she did actually say what she had to say,” Owen said.

The jury also ruled that the parish had not violated Louisiana’s open meetings law.

Banner said she had no regrets about bringing the lawsuit and said it uncovered the parish president’s hidden financial interests.

“The purpose of this case was for transparency,” Banner said. “I think it’s important to hold people accountable for the things that we feel are wrong.”

“I hope you can heal,” Eastern District of Louisiana Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown told Banner and the parish officials after the verdict. “This is only one part of the process.”

___

Brook is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Brook on X: @jack_brook96.