Judge Rejects Trump DOJ Bid to Charge Don Lemon Over Minnesota Church Storming

Federal Judge Denies DOJ’s Attempt to Charge Don Lemon in Church Protest Case

In a significant legal decision, a federal magistrate judge in Minnesota has refused to approve the Trump administration’s Justice Department (DOJ) request to charge former CNN anchor Don Lemon for his participation in a controversial protest that disrupted a church service in St. Paul. The incident, which took place at Cities Church, involved a group of anti-ICE activists who interrupted Sunday worship, sparking widespread media attention and political debate.

Don Lemon, 59, was among dozens of demonstrators who took part in the disruption, which targeted the church partly due to its association with immigration enforcement officials. Despite the DOJ’s efforts to bring criminal conspiracy charges against Lemon, the judge’s rejection marks a setback for the Trump administration’s aggressive approach to prosecuting protest-related activities.

Background: The Church Storming and Legal Controversy

The protest at Cities Church was organized by anti-ICE activists opposing immigration enforcement policies in Minnesota. Among the church’s leadership is Pastor David Easterwood, who reportedly serves as acting field director for ICE in the state, making the church a focal point for demonstrators.

Don Lemon was visibly involved in the protest, even posting videos before, during, and after the event that showed him actively participating and speaking on behalf of the group. The DOJ sought to charge Lemon and other activists with conspiracy against rights, invoking the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, a law designed to protect citizens’ civil rights from interference.

Attorney General Pam Bondi had announced arrests of two local activists linked to the protest, Nekima Levy Armstrong and Chauntyll Louisa Allen, both charged with conspiracy against rights. However, the judge declined to sign off on charges against Lemon, a decision that reportedly angered Bondi.

Legal Arguments and First Amendment Defense

Don Lemon’s defense argued that his actions during the protest were protected under the First Amendment, emphasizing his role as a journalist covering the event. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon highlighted that conspiracy charges could be applied when civil rights are violated, but Lemon’s legal team maintained that his participation was an exercise of free speech and assembly.

During the confrontation inside the church, Lemon engaged with Pastor Jonathan Parnell, who expressed disapproval of the disruption, calling it “shameful” to interrupt worship. Lemon countered by citing constitutional rights to protest, underscoring the tension between religious freedoms and protest rights in this case.

Implications of the Judge’s Decision on Protest-Related Charges

The rejection of the DOJ’s bid to charge Don Lemon has broader implications for how protest-related cases may be handled going forward, especially under politically charged circumstances. The Trump administration has been known for its tough stance on immigration enforcement and related protests, often seeking to criminalize demonstrations that disrupt government operations or public order.

Minnesota has been a hotspot for immigration enforcement tensions, with local leaders opposing federal crackdowns and activists organizing frequent protests. The legal battle involving Lemon and others reflects the ongoing conflict between federal authorities and community activists.

Moreover, the case raises questions about the limits of protest and the protections afforded by the First Amendment. While the DOJ cited the 1871 Klan Act to justify conspiracy charges, civil liberties advocates argue that peaceful protest and journalistic coverage should not be criminalized.

Political and Social Context Surrounding the Incident

The church storming occurred amid heightened tensions in Minneapolis and St. Paul due to immigration enforcement policies under the Trump administration. Following the fatal shooting of anti-deportation activist Renee Good earlier in January 2026, protests and confrontations have escalated.

President Trump has publicly supported aggressive immigration crackdowns, emphasizing the removal of convicted criminals and threatening to ease enforcement on law-abiding undocumented immigrants. Vice President JD Vance’s visit to Minnesota further signaled federal backing for law enforcement efforts in the region.

The involvement of prominent figures like Don Lemon and local activists has drawn national attention, highlighting the intersection of media, politics, and civil rights in contemporary protest movements.

Conclusion

The federal judge’s refusal to allow charges against Don Lemon in connection with the Minnesota church storming underscores the complex balance between law enforcement and constitutional rights. As protests and political tensions continue to shape the national discourse, this case serves as a crucial example of the challenges in prosecuting activism-related incidents.

If you want to stay informed about the latest developments in legal battles and political controversies, be sure to subscribe to our newsletter for timely updates and expert analysis.