MN - Journalist Don Lemon arrested for church protest, Minneapolis, 18 Jan 2026

[Ontario Mom]

This post is fine. Tricia

The indictment:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2027456467989573816

 

[Ontario Mom]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2027454253493547055

 

[SouthAussie]

So the videos that have been submitted on this thread, you are finally reviewing? Great and thanks. Let me know what you think.

Ushers have been beside doors since I was a wee one. They are there to guide and assist all. but I never encountered a locked door. It would be quite disconcerting to me if I did. IMO

Everyone is welcome to attend a house of worship. My friend told me yesterday she went to a mass, and she is not catholic.

Canon law says that Catholic churches cannot lock their doors during a service.

As Canon 1221 of the Code of Canon Law states: “Entry to a church at the hours of sacred functions is to be open and free of charge.”
So in light of this, closing the doors of a church to the faithful while Mass is being celebrated in that church is straightforwardly against the law.

Hawaii Catholic Herald

 

[PrairieWind]

So the videos that have been submitted on this thread, you are finally reviewing? Great and thanks. Let me know what you think.

Ushers have been beside doors since I was a wee one. They are there to guide and assist all. but I never encountered a locked door. It would be quite disconcerting to me if I did. IMO

Everyone is welcome to attend a house of worship. My friend told me yesterday she went to a mass, and she is not catholic.

I have watched lots of videos since this occurred. Are you talking about the same ones?
Ushers have always been part of my church experiences as well. Only in the last couple months has this policy be in place here and as I see in other parishes. It is to prevent church shootings, and disruptions. It is a shame for sure. I know many protestant churches have armed ushers now for the same purpose.
Not sure what your comment means about your friend being not catholic. Non-Catholics can still attend a service in any catholic church as far as I am award. Many Catholics can attend services in protestant churches. None are free to disrupt the services.

 

[seasideForest]

But a group of people could enter a mosque, with their cameras/phones held up, asking questions, but totally disrupting and stopping the prayers, stopping worship, and claim they are just covering a story and there is nothing can be done. Right?

I don't understand your point. Could you elaborate please?

 

[303gmf]

Outside of DL, and anyone else claiming to be a journalist, do people agree that the other protester's charges are warranted for intentionally disturbing the church service?

Nope

 

[PrairieWind]

Nope

So you believe that it IS ok to enter and disrupt a church service?

 

[PrairieWind]

Canon law says that Catholic churches cannot lock their doors during a service.

As Canon 1221 of the Code of Canon Law states: “Entry to a church at the hours of sacred functions is to be open and free of charge.”
So in light of this, closing the doors of a church to the faithful while Mass is being celebrated in that church is straightforwardly against the law.

Hawaii Catholic Herald

This Marie Cooper is posting this everywhere. But lets go straight to the Vatican and what canon law says, not her interpretation.

Code of Canon Law - Book IV - Function of the Church: Part III: Sacred places and times (Cann. 1205-1243)

Code of Canon Law - Book IV - Function of the Church (Cann. 1205-1243): Sacred places and times

www.vatican.va

"Can. 1221 Entry to a church is to be free and gratuitous during the time of sacred celebrations."
Not at all what she claims it is, is it?

 

[303gmf]

So you believe that it IS ok to enter and disrupt a church service?

I don’t believe it was meant to be disrupted but my bias a definite non-church type and thoughts of victim claiming by members could color.
However my belief in a journalist having rights is more important

 

[Ontario Mom]

I don’t believe it was meant to be disrupted but my bias a definite non-church type and thoughts of victim claiming by members could color.
However my belief in a journalist having rights is more important

I would encourage you to read Overt Act #16 on page 9 of the indictment:

 

[Sundog]

Everyone is welcome to attend a house of worship. My friend told me yesterday she went to a mass, and she is not catholic.

<Snipped for focus>

Everyone is welcome IF their purpose for being there is to worship. Not to stage a protest and interfere with the worship service. The January 18 mob was not welcome at the service.

 

[Jade]

Outside of DL, and anyone else claiming to be a journalist, do people agree that the other protester's charges are warranted for intentionally disturbing the church service?

My Church members would have started right away praying with the guests, the protestors, and would have had any willing protestors baptized on the spot, become members and begin accepting their tithes.

After all in the story in the gospels of the New Testament of Jesus Christ, a man, a protestor you may say, entered a place of religious sanctity with his protest of the religious authority of his time.

Legislation in some states, as a reaction to this incident, are seeking to criminalize anyone who acts to “intentionally obstruct, disturb, or interfere with the activities of the religious institution by making an utterance, gesture, or display in a manner that is offensive to the sensibilities of an ordinary person.”

They say that among those who “have a faith,” protests like those in the Minneapolis church are waged by “radical leftist, rude, crazy people,” As it was put by a lawmaker, “Individuals shouldn’t interrupt a church service or religious service just to make a political statement.”

If there were any sincerity here they then would be calling for the prohibition of ICE personnel from entering public schools and churches without proper notice.

The state representatives introducing laws, if they indeed care about freedom of religion, would not so explicitly support ICE, an agency, directed to disrupt religious services, that has kidnapped immigrants in church parking lots.

If those state’s representatives were truly committed to the First Amendment and its protection of religious practice, they would not remain silent as Trump’s Department of Justice cracks down on freedom of speech, seeking to prosecute Don Lemon, as he was covering the Minneapolis church protest.

The political perspective propagated by these state lawmakers has nothing to do with protecting freedom of religion, imo.

They are using whatever means necessary as justification for ideological intolerance and xenophobia, especially with Johnson amendment being done away with [Trump says], many Churches have changed from what we once thought of them; as being first and foremost “houses of prayer”.

All imo

 

[GatorsNorth]

<Snipped for focus>

Everyone is welcome IF their purpose for being there is to worship. Not to stage a protest and interfere with the worship service. The January 18 mob was not welcome at the service.

What “mob?” MOO

 

[Ruminations]

I don’t believe it was meant to be disrupted but my bias a definite non-church type and thoughts of victim claiming by members could color.
However my belief in a journalist having rights is more important

I don't think anyone, even the protesters, are against reasonable consequences for their disruption.

Sometimes, in protests, people get arrested or get citations. It's okay, as long as they actually are reasonably suspected of breaking a law.

Nobody is against a reasonable response to the protesters.

But the protesters were against the extremely inappropriate response to a 100% legal and not trespassing observer of ICE. She was shot dead just for recording what was going on in her neighborhood.

The protesters may have thought, give me a ticket- just please don't shoot another neighbor of mine.

Then, ICE did shoot another neighbor.

So, sure. Trespass the protesters. But the federal indictments are crazy over-reaction. And as lawyers say, the indictments appear to be no more than an attempt to chill protests and journalism. Protecting worshippers is just window dressing.

MOO

 

[keek]

Using the word 'mob' colors the interpretation of what was seen through a person's own lens. Factually it was not considered a mob by definition. It was not a large crowd nor violent. IMO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

But a group of people could enter a mosque, with their cameras/phones held up, asking questions, but totally disrupting and stopping the prayers, stopping worship, and claim they are just covering a story and there is nothing can be done. Right?

I never said that. I've been consistent in saying that the protestors who allegedly broke the law should be held accountable. I'm just of the opinion that DL wasn't a protestor; he was there as a journalist. I'm not sure why we're making this a Christian vs Muslim thing anyway. I would feel exactly the same if a journalist was arrested for covering a protest on a mosque.

MOO.

 

[PrairieWind]

I don't think anyone, even the protesters, are against reasonable consequences for their disruption.

Sometimes, in protests, people get arrested or get citations. It's okay, as long as they actually are reasonably suspected of breaking a law.

Nobody is against a reasonable response to the protesters.

But the protesters were against the extremely inappropriate response to a 100% legal and not trespassing observer of ICE. She was shot dead just for recording what was going on in her neighborhood.

The protesters may have thought, give me a ticket- just please don't shoot another neighbor of mine.

Then, ICE did shoot another neighbor.

So, sure. Trespass the protesters. But the federal indictments are crazy over-reaction. And as lawyers say, the indictments appear to be no more than an attempt to chill protests and journalism. Protecting worshippers is just window dressing.

MOO

But the protesters didn't go to an ICE facility to protest, they went to a church with completely innocent people inside. Would it be ok to protest the Somali community fraud accusations by occupying Somali mosques and preventing them from worshipping?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

It's in the affadavit. Paragraph 48 where witnesses note that one child told his father that he thought he was going to die and other witnesses describe traumatized children and other congregants as a result of the chants by protesters. Protesters screaming in children's faces telling them their parents were nazi's and they were going to burn in hell, etc., etc.

Affidavit for Criminal Complaint Against Protestors | PDF | U.S. Immigration And Customs Enforcement | American Government

This affidavit, submitted by Special Agent Timothy Gerber, outlines the investigation into a group of agitators who disrupted a religious service at Cities Church in St. Paul, MN on January 18, 2026. The group, led by Nekima Valdez Levy-Armstrong and Chauntyll Louisa Allen, coordinated their...

www.scribd.com

I find it interesting that none of it was captured on the 8-hour livestream or in any of the other videos floating about.

MOO.

 

[PrairieWind]

Using the word 'mob' colors the interpretation of what was seen through a person's own lens. Factually it was not considered a mob by definition. It was not a large crowd nor violent. IMO

The word "mob" is appropriate. Merriam Webster defines mob as "a large and disorderly crowd of people." It fits.

Definition of MOB

a large and disorderly crowd of people; especially : one bent on riotous or destructive action; a large number of people; a criminal set : gang; especially often Mob : mafia… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Outside of DL, and anyone else claiming to be a journalist, do people agree that the other protester's charges are warranted for intentionally disturbing the church service?

Sure, if they violated the law. What I'm not a fan of is a two-tiered government where violators of a law that was passed to protect abortion clinics can be convicted, then pardoned by the same government that enforces the exact same law against violators in a church.

I've seen the church vs mosque analogy a number of times in this thread. What I don't see much of is the analogy between the abortion clinic protestors and church protestors, both groups of which allegedly violated the same piece of legislation.

MOO.