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

[Ontario Mom]

All true @OM

But doesn't it just add another layer

RSBM

To me, the only layer it adds is "yeah but, why was her skirt so short?"

Except in this case it's "yeah but, they believe something I don't like". Well, to be blunt, it doesn't matter. You (general you, not you personally) don't get to blame your victim because they did something you didn't like, so you broke the law.

jmo

 

[tlcya]

The type of church doesn't matter at all, according to the federal statutes that the grand jury found were violated. That's the important part.

Literally, even if it was the Church of Satan, they have the same federal protections under the law that any other recognized religious house of worship has. (I have no idea if they're actually a recognized church but my point stands).

jmo

BBM I agree, we don't get to pick and choose which religions are afforded protection under the law to exercise their 1st amendment right to worship as they see fit.

Anymore than we get to choose who is afforded the right to peacefully assemble, exercise free speech, or of the press. It matters not if we like them or their ideals, these rights belong to all United States Citizens.

 

[keek]

Yes, it means that the person (in this case) was fatally shot, and it includes justifiable shootings by LE.

Which this of course was not and that will come out in the LEGAL sense, it is in the vision so clear of the rest of us what those videos show, very clear. ICE words to the killing of two young and life loving, humanity loving people: boo hoo and f...b.... Heard loud and clear. IMO

 

[Friday Fan]

This law: the FACE Act.

I agree. Don Lemon entered a church with a camera and microphone during a religious meeting. He filmed adult and children members of the church, and interrupted the religious meeting to ask questions.

"Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit:

(2) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship;"

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/senate-bill/636

What is the definition of "interfere" or "intimidate"? It's subjective here.

Yes, the protesters did this. They intentionally did this. There are some protesters who are willing to break laws to get their point across.

But is a journalist asking questions of the congregants after the protesters did the "interfering" and "intimidation" also "interfering" or "intimidating"? Should Don Lemon not have entered the church?

It certainly is not a crime for a journalist or a TV show to be at a "crime scene". I can't imagine TV w/o it...(LOL)

Journalists asks these questions all the time and yes, it's annoying, and sometimes people complain that it feels intimidating but it's not illegal. Everyone has the right not to speak to the press.


I don't think this case will stick.

 

[waldojabba]

dbm

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

This wasn't a fire or any kind of emergency. It was a Sunday church service with families with their children worshipping.

I used an example to make a point. But if we want to be more concrete, if every journalist is covering the protestors on the street, some journalist IS going to find another angle and in this case, that other angle was the church.

The point is, this is how journalists operate. This is nothing new.

MOO.

 

[Sundog]

Which this of course was not and that will come out in the LEGAL sense, it is in the vision so clear of the rest of us what those videos show, very clear. ICE words to the killing of two young and life loving, humanity loving people: boo hoo and f...b.... Heard loud and clear. IMO

Wrong thread.

imo

 

[Ontario Mom]

BBM I agree, we don't get to pick and choose which religions are afforded protection under the law to exercise their 1st amendment right to worship as they see fit.

Anymore than we get to choose who is afforded the right to peacefully assemble, exercise free speech, or of the press. It matters not if we like them or their ideals, these rights belong to all United States Citizens.

We fully agree. And when or if any of those rights are violated, those doing so need to face the full measure of the law, where applicable.

jmo

 

[marloweclover]

This wasn't a fire or any kind of emergency. It was a Sunday church service with families with their children worshipping.

But isn't it newsworthy that a group of protestors entered and disrupted a church service? Imo at that moment, it became an event that the public should be informed of, preferably filmed in real time so we could judge it for ourselves.

 

[tlcya]

We fully agree. And when or if any of those rights are violated, those doing so need to face the full measure of the law, where applicable.

jmo

I agree with that as well. I am just not convinced that journalists were participants in the way the protesters were or should be subject to the same punishment as the group of individuals who planned the disruption and interrupted the service. That is where I am still riding the fence. Maybe with further evidence I will land on one side over the other. But I am not there yet.

 

[Gators North]

The law that you cited implied that it is illegal for anybody ("journalist, non journalist etc) to interfere with a worship service. That might include following people in and giving "interviews".

In short, Lemon might not need to be part of a "protest". Rather, he might just have needed to have disrupt the service.

Bologna. MOO

 

[Sundog]

But isn't it newsworthy that a group of protestors entered and disrupted a church service? Imo at that moment, it became an event that the public should be informed of, preferably filmed in real time so we could judge it for ourselves.

I do wonder if the Church had its own video of the service. I see that the Pastor had a microphone, which could have just been to project his voice to the back of the church, but maybe they were videotaping the service. A lot of churches are doing that now, and especially since the covid days. Senior members of the church and others can't always make it to the Sunday service. In any event, if they do have a video, it may have been played before the grand jury as evidence and the prosecution has it as evidence. We will have to wait and see as the trial proceeds. Unless, of course, Lemon negotiates a plea deal. But unless the other defendants do that as well, there will be a trial or trials and we'll see all the evidence against the defendants then.

 

[waldojabba]

RSBM

To me, the only layer it adds is "yeah but, why was her skirt so short?"

Except in this case it's "yeah but, they believe something I don't like". Well, to be blunt, it doesn't matter. You (general you, not you personally) don't get to blame your victim because they did something you didn't like, so you broke the law.

jmo

@OM I think this is a Mischaraterization - sorry if I put you on the defensive and was not clear

- I am now educated in the differences between this religion and how I was brought up. I have been viewing it from my lens/ but when viewed thru your lens I understand your comments - I don't agree but understand - so we agree to disagree

As I stated : each to their own - not one better than the other just distinctly different views



JMO

 

[Friday Fan]

But isn't it newsworthy that a group of protestors entered and disrupted a church service? Imo at that moment, it became an event that the public should be informed of, preferably filmed in real time so we could judge it for ourselves.

Yes

 

[Ontario Mom]

But isn't it newsworthy that a group of protestors entered and disrupted a church service? Imo at that moment, it became an event that the public should be informed of, preferably filmed in real time so we could judge it for ourselves.

Pretty much what Lemon said on his livestream while he was inside the church badgering pastor Parnell.
Except he was also on camera long before it happened, talking to protestors and telling his live audience "something" was about to happen, and he was being careful not to give away locations, details, etc.

All of this is documented in the 12 page indictment located here Read the DOJ indictment of Don Lemon and other journalists, activists

 

[waldojabba]

I do wonder if the Church had its own video of the service. I see that the Pastor had a microphone, which could have just been to project his voice to the back of the church, but maybe they were videotaping the service. A lot of churches are doing that now, and especially since the covid days. Senior members of the church and others can't always make it to the Sunday service. In any event, if they do have a video, it may have been played before the grand jury as evidence and the prosecution has it as evidence. We will have to wait and see as the trial proceeds. Unless, of course, Lemon negotiates a plea deal. But unless the other defendants do that as well, there will be a trial or trials and we'll see all the evidence against the defendants then.

Good point about the video taping by the church.
Also I saw an elderly couple - congregants - taping with their phone the entire time and never moving from their seats - theirs could be helpful too.

Other Q - if you have read or know - there were many protestors there - why were only a limited number arrested? Two journaists and two others I believe appreciate it

JMO

 

[Ontario Mom]

I agree with that as well. I am just not convinced that journalists were participants in the way the protesters were or should subject to the same punishment as the group of individuals who planned the disruption and interrupted the service. That is where I am still riding the fence. Maybe with further evidence I will land on one side over the other. But I am not there yet.

Fair enough. From someone who watched Lemon's livestream as it was happening (it was posted on twitter/X live, from someone in the church), then read the indictment, it's quite literally an open/shut case. He quite brazenly admitted on camera, that he was with them, knew what they were going to do, why they were going to do it, and how they were going to do it. All of it's documented in the indictment and went down on camera exactly the way the indictment reads.

 

[Sundog]

Good point about the video taping by the church.
Also I saw an elderly couple - congregants - taping with their phone the entire time and never moving from their seats - theirs could be helpful too.

Other Q - if you have read or know - there were many protestors there - why were only a limited number arrested? Two journaists and two others I believe appreciate it

JMO

Glad to see that there was an elderly couple in the congregation that were videotaping it. I suspect others were as well. I really admired the two young people who got up from their pews and tried to engage the agitators and encourage them to leave. In spite of the hostility, screaming, shouting, insults etc. being directed at them. Impressive young people. IMO.

ETA I don't know why a limited number of protesters were arrested. Maybe there will be more arrests coming as they continue their investigation.

 

[tricia]

I agree, it is frustrating when people come into a thread late and haven’t read everything. I don’t think that means we don’t have to provide links again if someone asks, or link to our original post where we did provide that link. I am going to alert my post to a mod and maybe they can clarify.

Hang on @Emerald1328 I am answering your post. It is taking me a bit because of technical difficulties. It certainly can't be operator error or anything. LOL. Standby.

 

[Sillybilly]

This law: the FACE Act.

I agree. Don Lemon entered a church with a camera and microphone during a religious meeting. He filmed adult and children members of the church, and interrupted the religious meeting to ask questions.

"Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit:

(2) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship;"

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/senate-bill/636

Have ALL participants in the protest been charged?