The legal battles surrounding the January protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, have intensified, now encompassing a civil lawsuit alongside federal indictments. What began as a demonstration alleging the church’s pastor had ties to Immigration and Customs Enforcement has spiraled into a complex case with far-reaching implications.
Initially, a federal magistrate judge found no probable cause to arrest several individuals, including former CNN journalist Don Lemon, under a rarely used statute concerning church protests. However, a grand jury subsequently indicted Lemon and eight others, alleging conspiracy against religious freedom and interference with worship. Lemon maintains his innocence, asserting the case threatens journalistic freedom.
Prosecutors contend Lemon’s involvement extended beyond mere reporting, claiming he participated in pre-protest planning sessions and even expressed a desire to make the experience “traumatic and uncomfortable” for those attending services. They allege he cautioned others against revealing details of the plan, suggesting a level of operational involvement that transcends objective journalism.
Adding another layer to the legal challenge, a churchgoer, Ann Doucette, has filed a civil suit, claiming the disruption caused severe emotional distress and violated her religious rights. The suit alleges Lemon coordinated with protesters, livestreamed the event, and appeared to revel in the resulting chaos. The amount of damages sought remains undisclosed, but the emotional toll is clear.
This isn’t the first instance of a church being targeted by activists. The 1989 protest at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, organized by ACT UP and WHAM! during the AIDS epidemic, serves as a historical precedent. That demonstration, focused on the Catholic Church’s stance on safe sex and abortion, resulted in misdemeanor charges like trespassing and disorderly conduct.
The current case differs significantly. The Department of Justice is employing 18 U.S.C. § 241, a statute dating back to 1870 designed to prevent conspiracies aimed at depriving citizens of their constitutional rights, including the right to worship. This law focuses on intent and agreement to violate civil rights, a higher threshold than simple trespassing.
Lemon also faces charges under the FACE Act, which protects houses of worship from intentional obstruction or intimidation. The core question isn’t his presence at the protest, but whether he actively participated in its planning. Prosecutors argue that assisting in the organization of a disruption transforms a journalist into a co-conspirator.
Lemon frames the prosecution as an attack on the press, suggesting journalistic privilege shields him from accountability. However, legal experts point out that the right to worship is a fundamental constitutional right, and courts have historically prioritized this right over claims of press freedom, particularly on private property.
The federal prosecution of the Cities Church protest arrives at a critical juncture for religious liberty in the United States. While the First Amendment protects the right to protest, it simultaneously safeguards the free exercise of religion without fear of intimidation. Some, like Attorney General Pam Bondi, believe Christian congregations have been unfairly targeted as “soft targets” by political activists.
The shift in focus regarding religious protections is notable. While previous administrations invoked hate-crime legislation to protect other minority groups, concerns about attacks on Christian institutions were, according to some, previously overlooked. A recent task force was established to address anti-Christian bias, signaling a change in priorities and sparking debate.
This evolving legal landscape has ignited a political firestorm, with strong reactions from both sides of the aisle. The defense of Christian institutions by the current administration has drawn criticism from Democrats, highlighting the deeply polarized nature of this case and its potential to reshape the boundaries of religious freedom and journalistic responsibility in America.
