Three civic organizations began to make their case in federal court on Monday that the organizers of a Colorado election auditing effort conspired to intimidate voters in violation of longstanding voting rights law following the 2020 presidential race.

Testimony veered in various directions, touching on the legitimacy of the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. In response, U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeny admonished the parties to focus on what allegedly happened in Colorado in the months after the election.

At one point, she summoned all parties’ counsel to the bench to address them emphatically out of earshot.

“This has turned into a bit of a broader matter than it needs to be. This hearing isn’t about Jan. 6. This hearing isn’t about the Colorado secretary of state. It’s not even about the validity of the election,” she said in open court. “I want you to focus in on what we’re talking about, which is whether these three individuals intimidated voters.”

The Colorado Montana Wyoming State Area Conference of the NAACP, the League of Women Voters of Colorado, and Mi Familia Vota sued the founders of U.S. Election Integrity Plan (USEIP), which was an organized effort following the 2020 election to visit voters at their homes and inquire about their registrations and past voting behavior.

The plaintiffs alleged such conduct amounted to prohibited voter intimidation under the Voting Rights Act and a conspiracy to intimidate voters under the Ku Klux Klan Act. Some volunteers also carried, and potentially brandished, firearms, the groups claimed.

“Defendants interrogated voters about whether they voted in the 2020 election, how they voted, suggested they were part of an official inquiry, and took photographs of voters’ residences,” attorney Amy Erickson argued for the three civic groups.

She referenced USEIP’s “playbook,” published at the end of the canvassing campaign, which declared “we are not in a time of peace” and “we must undertake citizen audit activities to either refute or confirm serious allegations of election malfeasance.”

The canvassing effort of more than 9,400 homes ultimately resulted in a report claiming 7-12% of all contests in Colorado’s 2020 election “may be questionable” based on alleged irregularities. The defendants, who founded or represented USEIP beginning in late 2020, painted the campaign as benign.

“Imagine, your honor, when you’re looking out your window on a sunny day, you see two senior citizens approaching your house,” said attorney Cameron Powell, representing defendant Holly Kasun. “That canvasser says, ‘I’m with a nonpartisan campaign organization talking to voters. We’re here to confirm if county voting records are accurate.’ Would you feel fearful?”

Defendant Ashley Epp, a writer and podcast host, disputed that any of her political activity rose to the level of voter intimidation, and maintained the canvassing operation was lawful activity.

“The Internet is forever. And because of the plaintiffs, my name is forever attached to the Ku Klux Klan,” said Epp, who is representing herself.

Shawn Smith, the final defendant and a retired Air Force colonel, spoke about his self-directed review of voting machines and election-related data. Despite the absence of documented, widespread election fraud, Smith testified “it’s possible” the election was stolen from Trump and that Secretary of State Jena Griswold engaged in criminal conduct. He also said comments he made in 2022 that people who were involved in election fraud “deserve to hang” were reported out of context.

Smith, who admitted he carried a concealed gun while door-knocking, responded indignantly when questioned directly about the nefariousness of the effort.

“You mean when we exercised our First Amendment rights and engaged in the same kind of canvassing your clients do?” he replied to the plaintiffs’ attorney.

Epp also testified about her involvement with USEIP, saying the intent was primarily to pass along findings of voting discrepancies to authorities. She and Smith fielded questions about their presence in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6, which the plaintiffs attempted to link to the alleged voter intimidation in Colorado.

During the testimony and amid frequent objections from the defense, Sweeney became increasingly irritated that the plaintiffs’ lawyers broadly probed the defendants’ words, actions, and views on election integrity, while avoiding the subject of the trial: whether the door-to-door canvassing intimidated voters.

“I’m going to plead for you to get to something that gets to voter intimidation,” she demanded. “We’re not on anything that’s remotely close to what the claim in this case is.”

The trial was further marked by vocal reactions from the USEIP side of the courtroom. A woman sitting in the gallery exited after Sweeney rebuked one of the plaintiff’s attorneys, whispering, “This guy’s a clown, Jesus.” On another occasion, after Smith testified the plaintiff groups were “leftist organizations,” Sweeney scolded the spectators for audible chuckling.

“We’re not gonna have any laughing. If I hear it again, you’ll be asked to leave. This is a serious case with serious charges,” she said.

Prior to the trial, Smith asked for Sweeney to recuse herself. In a motion, Smith pointed out that Sweeney, an appointee of President Joe Biden, donated $200 to the Biden campaign during 2020 and mentioned publicly she “grew troubled by legal developments” after the 2016 election.

“While the issues in this case should not involve political affiliation, unfortunately, it does. The Court’s support for these views indicates a perception of bias,” argued Smith’s lawyers. Sweeney declined to recuse herself.

The trial is scheduled to continue for the remainder of the week. Sweeney will ultimately decide whether the defendants committed voter intimidation.

The case is Colorado Montana Wyoming State Area Conference of the NAACP et al. v. Smith et al.