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

[PrairieWind]

It is not irrelevant. It is what is causing the uproar among press organisations and citizens-who-want-to-know.
People are not loudly opposing his arrest because his being a journalist is irrelevant.

Magistrates have ruled that there was no probable cause to arrest Don. So the DOJ formed a grand jury, presented whatever information they wanted to provide, and got an indictment.

Is Grand Jury not the correct way for a federal indictment?

But you are listening to argument from a biased group, the journalists. Do we all agree that we all must obey the law? Yes. If DL broke the law, is he not subject to indictment? Yes. And the grand jury so found.

 

[otto]

I haven’t kept up, is there video of Lemon physically obstructing people or preventing them from leaving? The videos I’ve seen show him interviewing people pretty calmly.

He doesn’t meet the first few parameters of the FACE Act - violence/force/threat of force, so I’m assuming they’d be attempting to get him on physical obstruction.

Is there proof he specifically was physically obstructing people?

I could see trespassing charges but accusing Lemon of violating the FACE Act seems too overblown.

Yes. (bbm)

In video footage of Don Lemon interviewing the pastor, one of the protestors can be seen standing behind the pastor, almost touching his right shoulder. There is Don Lemon, the camera person, the person behind the pastor's shoulder, and (per the affidavit) one other person. They are standing very close to him.

The pastor stated that he wanted to look after his family and the congregation, but the protesters and Lemon did not make space for him to do that. They continued to "distract him with questions."

Per the affidavit, and corroborated by video footage, the pastor was "cornered" while Lemon was asking him questions.

FBI affidavit in suport of arrest warrant | 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

 

[PrairieWind]

Wasn’t the church service disrupted by the protest?

It came to a halt and DL was part of that. Does DL get to make that determination of when the service is ended?

 

[sunflowermomma]

Would it be ok for a white male or group thereof, to walk into a mosque at the beginning of prayers, begin yelling and prevent the prayers, for the purpose of telling those in attendance that a member of their mosque was an employee of a government agency? And then refuse to leave until the prayer service was abandoned?

It's not ok but Christians still do it, and they've never gotten federal charges for it. Don't you agree that the people in this article should get the same charges and vitriol as Don Lemon?

BTW, white people can be muslim. it's a religion, not a race. kinda scary you're an attorney and you don't know that, or don't care. Are you suggesting Don Lemon couldn't be a Christian because he's black?

'Repent or Burn': Christians Turn Controversial Mosque Into Abbott-Fueled Battlefield

The leaders of the East Plano Islamic Center respect their protestors, they just wish they'd lower the volume

www.dallasobserver.com

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

At one point, defendant LEMON posted himself at the main door of the Church, where he confronted some congregants and physically obstructed them as they tried to exit the Church building to challenge them with “facts” about immigration policy.

 

[JennieM]

It came to a halt and DL was part of that? Does DL get to make that determination of when the service is ended?

Are you suggesting DL brought it to a halt? If that’s not what you are suggesting, then your comment about him disrupting the service does not hold water. The service stopped because there was a protest. DL reported the protest.

 

[Ruminations]

Both the affidavit FBI affidavit in suport of arrest warrant | PDF | U.S. Immigration And Customs Enforcement | American Government and the indictment Read the DOJ indictment of Don Lemon and other journalists, activists make it very clear that the church members and specifically the pastor in question who is literally called "Victim #1" are the legal victims in this case. The charges in the indictment wouldn't even exist, without victims.

So just to be clear, IS this pastor considered a victim here and afforded the same respect as any other victim?

IMO, you are confusing "respect" and "privacy" The pastor is not entitled to privacy in his public facing roles. As a pastor, he's accountable to his congregation. As an ICE agent, he is accountable to the public. He is also a human that deserves respect, but in his case, that is not privacy.

He literally has spoken in public about this, and not to say, "please respect my privacy in these trying times." He basically used the podium of the Federal Government to counter- protest. He's escalating.

If he has a problem with the admittedly disruptive protesters, he should press charges and cooperate with the investigation into any violations quietly.


MOO

 

[otto]

There is no question that Nekima Levy Armstrong organized a group to invade and obstruct a religious service. She admits it in her interview with DL. That is her intent. DL should have at that time known this was an illegal act. He claims he didnt know the target, but obviously by the time they arrive at the church, it is clear what is happening. He chooses to enter the church himself. He himself interferes with the service by interviewing the pastor and refusing to leave as directed. His occupation as a journalist is irrelevant.

On January 30, 2026, Lemon said he did not know that the activists would disrupt the service. That means he knew they were going to a church "ahead of time" ... otherwise, what "service" is he referring to?

There was no one at the church with any affiliation to federal immigration officers, so the independent journalist argued with members of the congregation.

"Lemon said he was at the demonstration as a journalist. He said he was tipped off ahead of time but did not know the activists would disrupt the service. He can be seen arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement."

Ex-CNN journalist Don Lemon faces Minnesota protest charges

Former CNN news anchor Don Lemon appeared in court on Friday to face federal charges over his role covering a protest at a Minnesota church against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, the Republican administration's latest move against a critic.

www.reuters.com

~ in my opinion ~​

 

[PrairieWind]

It's not ok but Christians still do it, and they've never gotten federal charges for it. Don't you agree that the people in this article should get the same charges and vitriol as Don Lemon?

'Repent or Burn': Christians Turn Controversial Mosque Into Abbott-Fueled Battlefield

The leaders of the East Plano Islamic Center respect their protestors, they just wish they'd lower the volume

www.dallasobserver.com

So, those folks never invaded the mosque. They just yelled from outside, from 300 feet away. Which, under FACE, is not a violation. by the way, I find what those people did to be utterly despicable. And unsupportable.
But what I see here, is that many not only say the invasion of this church wasn't illegal, but also that it was a just thing to do. I don't even hear much condemnation for this act.

 

[PrairieWind]

IMO, you are confusing "respect" and "privacy" The pastor is not entitled to privacy in his public facing roles. As a pastor, he's accountable to his congregation. As an ICE agent, he is accountable to the public. He is also a human that deserves respect, but in his case, that is not privacy.

He literally has spoken in public about this, and not to say, "please respect my privacy in these trying times." He basically used the podium of the Federal Government to counter- protest. He's escalating.

If he has a problem with the admittedly disruptive protesters, he should press charges and cooperate with the investigation into any violations quietly.


MOO

Then should he not be confronted in public, and not inside his church? Keep in mind, he WASNT IN the church at the time. The attack was on his church, not him.

 

[SouthAussie]

Is Grand Jury not the correct way for a federal indictment?

But you are listening to argument from a biased group, the journalists. Do we all agree that we all must obey the law? Yes. If DL broke the law, is he not subject to indictment? Yes. And the grand jury so found.

I find it very interesting that a magistrate who is educated in legalities found no probable cause, but a pool of citizens from a specific judicial district did.


Typically, a federal grand jury is composed of 16 to 23 grand jurors, chosen from a pool of citizens within a specific judicial district.

How to Challenge a Federal Grand Jury Indictment | Kenney Legal Defense

A Federal Grand Jury Indictment does not mean the end. Explore tips to challenge the indictment and prepare for what follows.

www.kenneylegaldefense.us

 

[PrairieWind]

Are you suggesting DL brought it to a halt? If that’s not what you are suggesting, then your comment about him disrupting the service does not hold water. The service stopped because there was a protest. DL reported the protest.

Which he was a part of. did he disrupt the service? Yes. Did he help block the aisles just by being there and standing there? Yes. Did he refuse to leave when asked? Yes. He meets the elements of the act.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Where else would he put his microphone when waiting for a response from the pastor?

He was there as an agitator. He was speaking on behalf of the agitator group. He was standing so close, the pastor couldn’t move his arms. Then he proceeds to tell the pastor not to push him after the pastor’s hand lightly touches him. It’s in the video. imo

 

[SouthAussie]

At one point, defendant LEMON posted himself at the main door of the Church, where he confronted some congregants and physically obstructed them as they tried to exit the Church building to challenge them with “facts” about immigration policy.

I don't think that is right. Don was outside by the entrance - not impeding anyone - but interviewing. After he was asked to leave the church.

imo

 

[Ruminations]

The point is that he shouldn't have had a microphone in the face of a pastor during a Constitutionally protected worship service in the first place.

That in and of itself is a violation of the FACE act. He interfered with the ability of the people in the church to practice their 1A rights to freedom of religion by interfering with their order of worship.

It's a very clear violation, actually.

Had DL sat down quietly in a back pew and merely documented what was happening in the church without interfering/impeding the service, he may have had a legal defense.

His protestations that he was there as a "journalist" might not ring true to a jury once they see the footage.

That argument didn't hold sway with the Grand Jury that indicted him.

And even if he WAS acting in the role of a journalist, journalists aren't immunized when it comes to interfering with 1A rights. They don't have carte blanche to run roughshod over the FACE act because press badge.

So there's that.

JMO.

There was no defense argument in the grand jury.

That's not how grand juries work.

MOO

 

[PrairieWind]

I find it very interesting that a magistrate who is educated in legalities found no probable cause, but a pool of citizens from a specific judicial district did.


Typically, a federal grand jury is composed of 16 to 23 grand jurors, chosen from a pool of citizens within a specific judicial district.

How to Challenge a Federal Grand Jury Indictment | Kenney Legal Defense

A Federal Grand Jury Indictment does not mean the end. Explore tips to challenge the indictment and prepare for what follows.

www.kenneylegaldefense.us

And yet here we are? How do you explain it? A grand jury indicted the defendants.

 

[SouthAussie]

Did he refuse to leave when asked?

No.

 

[SouthAussie]

And yet here we are? How do you explain it? A grand jury indicted the defendants.

The district from which the grand jurors were chosen?
The curated evidence that was presented to the grand jury?

We all know that the defence is not even allowed to be in the room.

 

[tricia]

He is also a private citizen. He and his family and church are now victims of a crime. Are they not also entitled to that definition?

The pastor’s name has been reported in mainstream media. His family is off limits.
There will be no sleuthing of church members, and the church’s beliefs are not part of this discussion.
The protest was directed at the pastor personally and focused on his work with ICE, and to some extent his beliefs.
While the reason for the protest is not the main topic, it is unrealistic to prohibit all discussion of why the protest occurred. Some limited discussion is unavoidable.
Please keep in mind: we have never had a situation like this on Websleuths before. If the journalists had not been arrested and charged with the same crimes as the protesters, this discussion would not be happening at all.
Tricia
P.S. I reserve the right to adjust this post as needed. We are learning and adapting as the discussion develops.

 

[tricia]

And yet here we are? How do you explain it? A grand jury indicted the defendants.

I would like to see what evidence was presented to the grand jury.