Key facts
- Seven protesters were convicted of six misdemeanors each, including false imprisonment and obstruction of thoroughfare.
- Jurors were unable to reach a verdict on felony conspiracy and a misdemeanor trespassing charge.
- One defendant, Sara Cantor, was convicted of an additional misdemeanor for refusing to disperse.
- Sentencing for the protesters is scheduled for August 21.
- The protest, which occurred in April 2024, blocked traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge for over four hours.
Seven protesters who blocked traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge during a 2024 anti-war demonstration have been found guilty of misdemeanor charges. The jury deliberated for seven days but was deadlocked on the most serious charge of felony conspiracy, which carried a potential 15-year prison sentence, and also could not reach a verdict on a misdemeanor trespassing charge.
Each of the seven defendants was convicted of six misdemeanors, including false imprisonment and obstruction of thoroughfare. One defendant, Sara Cantor, was convicted of an additional misdemeanor charge of refusing to disperse. Sentencing is scheduled for August 21, with six defendants facing a maximum of five years in jail and Cantor facing five and a half years.
During the trial, prosecutors argued the April 2024 demonstration blocked traffic for over four hours, trapping motorists and constituting a conspiracy and false imprisonment. Defense attorneys contended that the protesters were acting out of a moral obligation to stop genocide and were protesting U.S. financial and military aid to Israel, having exhausted other avenues of communication.
The incident, known as the “Golden Gate 26,” initially led to 26 arrests, but charges against 19 were later dropped or deferred. Rachel Lederman, an attorney supporting the defendants, expressed surprise that felony conspiracy charges were not reduced to misdemeanors, calling the continued prosecution "outrageous and unprecedented."
The Golden Gate Bridge transit authority sought restitution for lost toll revenue, a move critics called unusual for traffic-blocking protests and indicative of targeting for pro-Palestinian views. These restitution claims were resolved before trial with individual defendants paying three- and low-four-figure sums. The bridge has historically been a site for various protests since the late 1980s.