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

[Izzylizzy]

@ 4:26 "The Face Act"
Lemon's attorney Abbe Lowell.

 

[bearfossils]

I get it. In theory I would agree. IMO I am concerned DL crossed a line. And I think, as an actual journalist of many many years, he knew it when he did it. Maybe he did so in the heat of the moment on the chase for his scoop, but IMO that moment wondering do I go in when outside the church, that was him acknowledging he was concerned himself about how close to the line he was.

What if he did so knowing he would be prosecuted. What if that was the point for him? Strong convictions, personal promotion, some other motivator. Maybe this is exactly what he wanted to come from his actions that day?

What happens when the line has been blurred by our government itself? Other journalists have crossed theoretical or possibly ethical lines while pursuing a story for the greater good. The line is being moved, blurred, or erased all together by higher authorities; at what point does one’s job as a journalist require one to do the same to an extent?

We aren’t living in a world of black and white: it’s all shades of gray, albeit ones that are growing starker and starker. If we have a government that regularly violates the rights of citizens and certain groups without consequence, then why should journalists hoping to expose those violations be so drastically held to the same supposed “standards”?

 

[Izzylizzy]

Snip:

"Here’s what to know about the law and how the Trump administration has wielded it thus far:"

What is the FACE Act? ​

'The law, signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1994, prohibits the use of force, physical obstruction, intimidation or interference with people trying to access reproductive health clinics, including both abortion clinics and anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers. Another statute of the law — the one being invoked against Lemon — prohibits the same actions at places of religious worship.

It was passed on the heels of mounting violence facing abortion providers — including the murders of physicians — in the late 1980s and early ’90s. That rise in violence was tied to Operation Rescue, a Christian organization that organized mass clinic blockades and protests across the country, which also attracted the participation of some of the people who eventually murdered abortion providers.

At the time of its passage, “the FACE Act was bipartisan — it was not a particularly divisive thing,” said Mary Ziegler, a historian and professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law, who has written seven books on the history of abortion in America.

“There was a feeling in the wake of all these killings that the national temperature needed to be lowered,” she added.

How is the Trump administration using it? ​

The Trump administration has selectively interpreted the law, seemingly to target the president’s political opponents, Ziegler said. “The Trump administration is definitely focused on the ideology, not the tactics” of protesters, she said.

Four days into President Donald Trump’s second term, the Department of Justice released a memo alleging that the FACE Act had been weaponized against anti-abortion protesters, and declared that it would roll back most prosecutions under the law, except for cases “presenting significant aggravating factors, such as death, serious bodily harm, or serious property damage.”

Most cases could “adequately be addressed under state or local law,” the DOJ added. The memo also called for the dismissal of three pending federal FACE Act cases filed against defendants for impeding access to abortion clinics in Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in 2021 and 2022.

At the same time, Trump pardoned two dozen anti-abortion activists whom the Biden administration charged under the FACE Act for entering and refusing to leave clinics, blocking patients from accessing their appointments, harassing and injuring staff and livestreaming some of their crimes. Several of the people Trump pardoned had been committing similar crimes for decades and had dozens of arrests under their belt.'

What is the FACE Act, an obscure law used to prosecute Don Lemon?

The Trump administration has reinterpreted the law, historically used to prosecute anti-abortion-rights activists who block reproductive health clinics.

www.ms.now

 

[LAborn]

So that was after he exited the church? What about while he was inside?

The journalist is unrecognizable. Whether he has his head covered with two hats and wearing dark sunglasses, or has a neck tube covering his nose and mouth, is there any real difference?
View attachment 641096
(image from comment upthread)

Confused by your post. If you've watched Don Lemon, he usually says, "Hi, how are you. Can I talk to you?" Then he'll ask a question to get the convo going, but generally, he doesn't direct the narrative so people share their stories. He carries a big microphone, and this cameraman with a camera follows him everywhere when he's streaming. Not everyone knows who he is, but a lot of the time people will recognize him. In other words, it's obvious he's reporting and conducting interviews.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Or the fact that it was snowing and probably minus 0° out? I don’t know what you want me to say to this? He’s dressed for winter, outside. The winter in Minnesota is no joke. He wasn’t covering his face, he has on sunglasses. It’s literally snowing so he has a hat and hood up. He’s a lot less covered than any ICE agent patrolling the streets. IMO.

Yes. He borrowed a hat from his driver.

Well actually, he switched hats with him.

Source: YT Live

 

[Hexe]

The journalist is unrecognizable. Whether he has his head covered with two hats and wearing dark sunglasses, or has a neck tube covering his nose and mouth, is there any real difference?

What's the point...? He was recording a video to upload it later on his yt profile, under his name. The video in question has a big signature "Don live on the scene". So what does his clothing has to do with anything?

 

[SouthAussie]

What happens when the line has been blurred by our government itself? Other journalists have crossed theoretical or possibly ethical lines while pursuing a story for the greater good. The line is being moved, blurred, or erased all together by higher authorities; at what point does one’s job as a journalist require one to do the same to an extent?

We aren’t living in a world of black and white: it’s all shades of gray, albeit ones that are growing starker and starker. If we have a government that regularly violates the rights of citizens and certain groups without consequence, then why should journalists hoping to expose those violations be so drastically held to the same supposed “standards”?

For the last 9 years we have been hearing "FAKE NEWS".

I am glad Don Lemon went into the church. At least now there is independent corroboration of exactly when the protesters stood up and protested, of them not touching any parishioners .....

imo

 

[Ontario Mom]

That does not change the fact that he was arrested because he reported on a story. That is a chilling incident. This has me very worried about freedom of the press.

That's not what the indictment says. He was arrested for violating the rights of others, specifically:

- COUNT ONE 18 US.C. § 241 — Conspiracy Against Right of Religious Freedom at Place of Worship
- COUNT TWO 18 U.S.C. § 248(a)(2),(b), § 2(a) — Injure, Intimidate, and Interfere with Exercise of Right of Religious Freedom at Place of Worship

I agree that it's chilling, if he walks away without any accountability. It will set a precedent for some extremist wacko to do something similar, and claim the same thing Lemon is. I don't think that's a society anyone wants to live in.

jmo

 

[tlcya]

What happens when the line has been blurred by our government itself? Other journalists have crossed theoretical or possibly ethical lines while pursuing a story for the greater good. The line is being moved, blurred, or erased all together by higher authorities; at what point does one’s job as a journalist require one to do the same to an extent?

We aren’t living in a world of black and white: it’s all shades of gray, albeit ones that are growing starker and starker. If we have a government that regularly violates the rights of citizens and certain groups without consequence, then why should journalists hoping to expose those violations be so drastically held to the same supposed “standards”?

you raise a good and MOO salient point in this case. Lots of lines, lots of crossing. I don't have the answers. The world has gone mad. Or maybe it's always been mad but this is a variety I don't quite know how to process.

 

[Izzylizzy]

The journalist is unrecognizable. Whether he has his head covered with two hats and wearing dark sunglasses, or has a neck tube covering his nose and mouth, is there any real difference?
View attachment 641096
(image from comment upthread)

Lemon is totally recognizable throughout his interviewing.

 

[Izzylizzy]

That's not what the indictment says. He was arrested for violating the rights of others, specifically:

- COUNT ONE 18 US.C. § 241 — Conspiracy Against Right of Religious Freedom at Place of Worship
- COUNT TWO 18 U.S.C. § 248(a)(2),(b), § 2(a) — Injure, Intimidate, and Interfere with Exercise of Right of Religious Freedom at Place of Worship

I agree that it's chilling, if he walks away without any accountability. It will set a precedent for some extremist wacko to do something similar, and claim the same thing Lemon is. I don't think that's a society anyone wants to live in.

jmo

No big deal according to how the "FACE ACT" is now being tossed into the dust bin of history.

Snip:

"Here’s what to know about the law and how the Trump administration has wielded it thus far:"

'The law, signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1994, prohibits the use of force, physical obstruction, intimidation or interference with people trying to access reproductive health clinics, including both abortion clinics and anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers. Another statute of the law — the one being invoked against Lemon — prohibits the same actions at places of religious worship.

It was passed on the heels of mounting violence facing abortion providers — including the murders of physicians — in the late 1980s and early ’90s. That rise in violence was tied to Operation Rescue, a Christian organization that organized mass clinic blockades and protests across the country, which also attracted the participation of some of the people who eventually murdered abortion providers.

At the time of its passage, “the FACE Act was bipartisan — it was not a particularly divisive thing,” said Mary Ziegler, a historian and professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law, who has written seven books on the history of abortion in America.

“There was a feeling in the wake of all these killings that the national temperature needed to be lowered,” she added.

The Trump administration has selectively interpreted the law, seemingly to target the president’s political opponents, Ziegler said. “The Trump administration is definitely focused on the ideology, not the tactics” of protesters, she said.

Four days into President Donald Trump’s second term, the Department of Justice released a memo alleging that the FACE Act had been weaponized against anti-abortion protesters, and declared that it would roll back most prosecutions under the law, except for cases “presenting significant aggravating factors, such as death, serious bodily harm, or serious property damage.”

Most cases could “adequately be addressed under state or local law,” the DOJ added. The memo also called for the dismissal of three pending federal FACE Act cases filed against defendants for impeding access to abortion clinics in Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in 2021 and 2022.

At the same time, Trump pardoned two dozen anti-abortion activists whom the Biden administration charged under the FACE Act for entering and refusing to leave clinics, blocking patients from accessing their appointments, harassing and injuring staff and livestreaming some of their crimes. Several of the people Trump pardoned had been committing similar crimes for decades and had dozens of arrests under their belt.'

What is the FACE Act, an obscure law used to prosecute Don Lemon?​

The Trump administration has reinterpreted the law, historically used to prosecute anti-abortion-rights activists who block reproductive health clinics.

www.ms.now

 

[Barbb]

No big deal according to how the "FACE ACT" is now being tossed into the dust bin of history.

Snip:

"Here’s what to know about the law and how the Trump administration has wielded it thus far:"

'The law, signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1994, prohibits the use of force, physical obstruction, intimidation or interference with people trying to access reproductive health clinics, including both abortion clinics and anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers. Another statute of the law — the one being invoked against Lemon — prohibits the same actions at places of religious worship.

It was passed on the heels of mounting violence facing abortion providers — including the murders of physicians — in the late 1980s and early ’90s. That rise in violence was tied to Operation Rescue, a Christian organization that organized mass clinic blockades and protests across the country, which also attracted the participation of some of the people who eventually murdered abortion providers.

At the time of its passage, “the FACE Act was bipartisan — it was not a particularly divisive thing,” said Mary Ziegler, a historian and professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law, who has written seven books on the history of abortion in America.

“There was a feeling in the wake of all these killings that the national temperature needed to be lowered,” she added.

The Trump administration has selectively interpreted the law, seemingly to target the president’s political opponents, Ziegler said. “The Trump administration is definitely focused on the ideology, not the tactics” of protesters, she said.

Four days into President Donald Trump’s second term, the Department of Justice released a memo alleging that the FACE Act had been weaponized against anti-abortion protesters, and declared that it would roll back most prosecutions under the law, except for cases “presenting significant aggravating factors, such as death, serious bodily harm, or serious property damage.”

Most cases could “adequately be addressed under state or local law,” the DOJ added. The memo also called for the dismissal of three pending federal FACE Act cases filed against defendants for impeding access to abortion clinics in Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in 2021 and 2022.

At the same time, Trump pardoned two dozen anti-abortion activists whom the Biden administration charged under the FACE Act for entering and refusing to leave clinics, blocking patients from accessing their appointments, harassing and injuring staff and livestreaming some of their crimes. Several of the people Trump pardoned had been committing similar crimes for decades and had dozens of arrests under their belt.'

What is the FACE Act, an obscure law used to prosecute Don Lemon?​

The Trump administration has reinterpreted the law, historically used to prosecute anti-abortion-rights activists who block reproductive health clinics.

www.ms.now

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE) was introduced by Representative Chuck Schumer and co-sponsored by Representative Constance Morella in the House of Representatives, while Senator Edward Kennedy introduced a version in the Senate. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on May 26, 1994.

 

[AppleTreeGreen]

JMO, but I don’t think the charges will stick either. From what I understand based on Congress.gov, Shehe FACE Act states that it prohibits attempting or intentionally intimidating, injuring or interfering via force, threat of force or physical obstruction to impede on religious freedom in places of worship or access to clinics that provide reproductive health services. It also prohibits property damages at such sites as well.

By interviewing, observing and recording the protest it does not appear that DL and GF were injuring, intimidating or using physically obstruction or threats to impede on others exercising their First Amendment Rights to worship in the church. It also doesn’t restrict peaceful demonstrations like picketing at these locations, according to USA Today.

This may be why a Federal Magistrate and Appeals Court in Minnesota found insufficient evidence to indict DL for criminal activity.

According to New Republic, it is unusual for a prosecutor to use a grand jury as an alternative to get an indictment after already receiving a ruling from the Federal Magistrate, like the Justice Department did.

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

Don Lemon, Georgia Fort released after arrests tied to anti-ICE protest

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/31/nx-s1-5695230/don-lemon-georgia-fort-release

Don Lemon's arrest is attack on press freedom, advocates say

Lemon was arrested on Jan. 29 in relation to a Minnesota church protest. His attorney called it an "unprecedented attack on the First Amendment."

www.usatoday.com

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/01/30/don-lemon-released-without-bail-after-arrest-receives-backlash-from-advocates/

Trump’s Agents Arrested Don Lemon. Then the Story Got Even Darker.

Trump has been raging about the former CNN journalist. Attorney General Pam Bondi just had him arrested, a move one legal expert slammed as “highly irregular.”

newrepublic.com

 

[LAborn]

I get it. In theory I would agree. IMO I am concerned DL crossed a line. And I think, as an actual journalist of many many years, he knew it when he did it. Maybe he did so in the heat of the moment on the chase for his scoop, but IMO that moment wondering do I go in when outside the church, that was him acknowledging he was concerned himself about how close to the line he was.

What if he did so knowing he would be prosecuted. What if that was the point for him? Strong convictions, personal promotion, some other motivator. Maybe this is exactly what he wanted to come from his actions that day?

He didn't cross any line. He was following a lead, again what journalists do. JMO

 

[bearfossils]

you raise a good and MOO salient point in this case. Lots of lines, lots of crossing. I don't have the answers. The world has gone mad. Or maybe it's always been mad but this is a variety I don't quite know how to process.

Charming, but I don’t agree. There is a clear and visible progress our country has been taking toward authoritarianism, and censorship of the press, both on small and local levels, and federal and widespread levels. Journalists being able to practice their job isn’t something that should be impeded on. We shouldn’t even give a about what Lemon did outside of the article or news blip that followed it.

The world has not gone mad; there is a group of people, which align themselves with Evangelicalism, misogyny, and white Christian nationalism, that have been working their way into government since 9/11 who have found a fist in Trump as a candidate. Our democracy is being eroded by events like this. Trying to ignore the political nature of them, or denying them, is akin to looking the other way while a fire burns.

This is no longer a matter of a difference of opinion. To pretend like it is, is to play a game of distractions. Authoritarianism wins by small steps. Eventually, there will only be one side, and there will be no more arguments or debates. Fighting back and taking a stand in the small ways are important. True democracy matters.

 

[Rolypolyoly]

Storm a church?
He covered the news, no storming involved by any measure

I thought I read in this thread that the protesters were sitting in the pews waiting for the service to begin, and that DL entered through a side door and set up with his camera guy to film? Neither of which sound like storming the church to me, but

Does anyone know if the cameraman was also arrested?