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

[concernedcitizen706]

Well the entire group sure tried to use intimidation tactics and clearly interfered with the congregants right to worship in the sanctity of their own church.

Y'all can't read the laws and apparently almost nobody in the country can either. I
t says doing all those things, using FORCE. Or OBSTRUCTION. Neither of which the journalists or the protesters did.

If they did not use force or obstruction to accomplish their means, such as interfering with the service, then this law does not apply to them.

Otherwise a state law would apply to them, probably trespassing.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

It looks like a pied piper scenario.

I think that a charismatic leader made irresponsible promises. She organized 40 protesters and led them into a church to disrupt families with children during Sunday morning worship. Given her credentials as a reverend, lawyer, activist and media personality, protesters would have trusted that she was acting within the law.

The independent journalist should have considered professional journalism code of ethics and standards to assess whether his actions were legal under First Amendment press rights in the context of the FACE Act and First Amendment religion rights. That is, he had a higher responsibility to make an independent decision regarding interviewing a pastor and the congregation during a scheduled religious meeting.

However - although the stated intent of the protest was to inform the congregation about a church member's second job, Lemon stated prior to the protest that the intent was "a “resistance” operation against federal immigration policies." It's unknown why he believed federal immigration policies were decided by a church. As a journalist, presumably he did research and arrived at this belief independent of outside influence.

"Lemon, who was fired from CNN in 2023, said he has no affiliation to the organization that went into the church and he was there as a solo journalist chronicling protesters.
...

Since he left CNN, Lemon posts regularly on YouTube and has not hidden his disdain for Trump. During his online show from the church he interviewed churchgoers and demonstrators.
...

Lemon started live-streaming and told the audience he was with a group gearing up for a “resistance” operation against federal immigration policies, according to the document. ... Lemon thanked Nekima Levy Armstrong for what she was doing and assured her he was not saying what was going on.
...

Some experts and activists said the charges are not only an attack on press freedoms but also a strike against Black Americans who count on Black journalists to bear witness to injustice and oppression."

Former CNN anchor Don Lemon arrested, lawyer says

Journalist Don Lemon and three other people were arrested Friday in connection with an anti-immigration enforcement protest that disrupted a service at a Minnesota church and increased tensions between residents and U.S. federal officials.

www.ctvnews.ca

Nekima Levy Armstrong

Nekima Levy Armstrong is an award-winning civil rights lawyer, activist, and former president of the Minneapolis NAACP. She is a frequent speaker on national news outlets about racial justice advocacy and public policy, most notably including an interview with Oprah.

www.nekimalevyarmstrong.com

~ in my opinion ~​

Yeah if that woman lawyer did it, as in she was responsible for it, then I would look into her background a little more to see who paid her off. I think you greatly overestimate people's knowledge of the laws. I think 99% of people were not aware that it's a big deal to protest in a church. I consider myself fairly well informed and I never knew about that until now. Probably only lawyers would know about that. Or religious leaders. You can clearly see Don Lemon didn't realize it during the protest, from what he was saying. So yeah maga set Don up I'm pretty sure. Probably some Russian lawyer plotted this after studying all our laws and and sent the word out and Maga got it done. But they can't use this trick again now because now everybody knows, lol. It was a one-time trick.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Y'all can't read the laws and apparently almost nobody in the country can either. It says doing all those things, using FORCE. Or OBSTRUCTION. Neither of which the journalists or the protesters did.

If they did not use force or obstruction to accomplish their means, such as interfering with the service, then this law does not apply to them.

Otherwise a state law would apply to them, probably trespassing.

The words in the law are "or" not "and". It doesn't say all those things, it says any
. Speaking of reading.

JMO

 

[Ontario Mom]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2019453685294653559

 

[otto]

Physical obstruction means blocking their way to the service. Don Lemon or his group did not do that.

My understanding is that the obstruction charge for Don Lemon relates to blocking the pastor from his congregation and family:

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

 

[otto]

How so? What I see is a journalist who put on his journalist hat and began doing what journalists do on the daily, what they are Constitutionally protected to do.

MOO.

My understanding of the First Amendment is that, regarding:

• Religion - protects the right to practice religion freely
• Press - ensure the freedom of news media to report without government censorship

I haven't found any discussion regarding First Amendment, and press rights versus religion rights. The issue here seems to be: who has priority regarding First Amendment rights?

The First Amendment protects the right to practice religion freely. That is, no one has the right to interrupt, disrupt, interfere, intimidate, or obstruct people practicing religion. A scheduled religious ceremony would be defined as "practicing religion".

The First Amendment ensures the right of the press to report without government censorship. Is government censorship at play when an independent journalist enters a church with protesters intent to launch a "resistance operation against federal immigration policies," and to prevent a religious group from practicing religion?

I think the first question has to be: is it reasonable, or protected by the First Amendment, to launch a resistance operation against federal policies in a church while families and children are practicing religion?

The second question has to be: is the press protected when accompanying a resistance operation into a church to document hostile and aggressive action against those practicing religion? If the resistance operation will foreseeably cause psychological injury, is the press given a pass to document the intent to cause unjustified harm and the resulting trauma?

"Lemon started live-streaming and told the audience he was with a group gearing up for a “resistance” operation against federal immigration policies, according to the document. Lemon “took steps to maintain operational secrecy ..."​

​

During the briefing before the operation, prosecutors say, Lemon thanked Nekima Levy Armstrong, a prominent local activist for what she was doing and assured her he was not saying what was going on.​

​

Inside the church the defendants shouted slogans and blew whistles after the pastor was about to begin the sermon and gestured in a hostile and aggressive manner, according to prosecutors, and the pastor and congregants perceived “threats of violence.”​

​

Lemon told the livestream he saw a young man who was frightened, sad and crying and it was understandable because the experience was traumatic and uncomfortable, the indictment says.”​

January 30, 2026

Former CNN anchor Don Lemon arrested, lawyer says

Journalist Don Lemon and three other people were arrested Friday in connection with an anti-immigration enforcement protest that disrupted a service at a Minnesota church and increased tensions between residents and U.S. federal officials.

www.ctvnews.ca

~ in my humble opinion ~​

 

[Inthedetails]

I haven't found any discussion regarding First Amendment, and press rights versus religion rights. The issue here seems to be: who has priority regarding First Amendment rights?

snipped

There is not a priority. The First Amendment is the First Amendment.

jmo

 

[otto]

I wish we would stop using the word trauma repeatedly.

<respectfully snipped by me>

The reason we use the word "trauma" is because "traumatic" is the word that Don Lemon used to describe the consequence and psychological harm caused by the "resistance operation".

"Lemon started live-streaming and told the audience he was with a group gearing up for a “resistance” operation against federal immigration policies,
...

Lemon told the livestream he saw a young man who was frightened, sad and crying and it was understandable because the experience was traumatic and uncomfortable.”

Former CNN anchor Don Lemon arrested, lawyer says

Journalist Don Lemon and three other people were arrested Friday in connection with an anti-immigration enforcement protest that disrupted a service at a Minnesota church and increased tensions between residents and U.S. federal officials.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[otto]

snipped

There is not a priority. The First Amendment is the First Amendment.

jmo

Hypothetically, if the resistance operation was to cause physical harm (rather than psychological harm) to a religious group practicing religion, and a journalist attended pre-op planning, then the journalist is within his rights to accompany the resistance operation to the location of the intended operation to film the traumatic event and interview the injured about the experience?

The independent journalist is within his rights to ignore injury while getting the story? The independent journalist is within his rights to "obstruct" the leader whose role it is to comfort the injured?

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

~ in my humble opinion ~​

 

[Inthedetails]

Hypothetically, if the resistance operation was to cause physical harm (rather than psychological harm) to a religious group practicing religion, and a journalist attended pre-op planning, then the journalist is within his rights to accompany the resistance operation to the location of the intended operation to film the traumatic event and interview the injured about the experience?

The independent journalist is within his rights to ignore injury while getting the story? The independent journalist is within his rights to "obstruct" the leader whose role it is to comfort the injured?

View attachment 642126

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

~ in my humble opinion ~​

A journalist has the right to observe, gather information, document, and report.

I recently heard a journalist talk about how difficult it is to see someone in distress when he's covering a story because his job is to record and report, not to render aid. That is a heavy burden on a journalist. There is a reason people DON'T pursue the careeer of journalist - because they find it too difficult and this would be one example. Another example would be the challenge of writing an exposé on someone who is well-liked and that exposé will cause the person embarassment or worse, but a journalist should not shirk from the story just because it's ugly or hurtful.

jmo

 

[J. J. in Phila]

A journalist has the right to observe, gather information, document, and report.

I recently heard a journalist talk about how difficult it is to see someone in distress when he's covering a story because his job is to record and report, not to render aid. That is a heavy burden on a journalist. There is a reason people DON'T pursue the careeer of journalist - because they find it too difficult and this would be one example. Another example would be the challenge of writing an exposé on someone who is well-liked that exposé will cause the person embarassment or worse, but a journalist should not shirk from the story just because it's ugly or hurtful.

jmo

There are several questions, to which I don't have an answer for at this point:

1. Was Lemon involved in the planning of this?

2. Did Lemon enter a non public area and obstruct any of the church members? (A journalist has a right to cover the story, but not obstruct others.)

 

[otto]

A journalist has the right to observe, gather information, document, and report.

I recently heard a journalist talk about how difficult it is to see someone in distress when he's covering a story because his job is to record and report, not to render aid. That is a heavy burden on a journalist. There is a reason people DON'T pursue the careeer of journalist - because they find it too difficult and this would be one example. Another example would be the challenge of writing an exposé on someone who is well-liked that exposé will cause the person embarassment or worse, but a journalist should not shirk from the story just because it's ugly or hurtful.

jmo

The question is not whether an independent journalist has a responsibility to render aid, but whether an independent journalist has a responsibility to not obstruct those whose role it is to render aid.

During the "resistance operation" at the church, the widely understood role of the religious leader is to comfort the injured. Lemon is on camera with "agitators" "obstructing" the pastor when he appeared to be "worried and distraught". The pastor clearly stated that he had to take care of his congregation and family, and asked those obstructing him to leave the building.

Rather than respectfully leave the building, the independent journalist asked permission to worship. After he was welcomed to worship, he remained in the building for 13 additional minutes, but did not worship.

According to the independent journalist, he "always worships". If so, why did he ask permission from the pastor to worship?

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

 

[otto]

There are several questions, to which I don't have an answer for at this point:

1. Was Lemon involved in the planning of this?

2. Did Lemon enter a non public area and obstruct any of the church members? (A journalist has a right to cover the story, but not obstruct others.)

Don Lemon denies that he was involved in the planning, however his own words and actions raise doubt. That is, he attended a pre-op meeting, where he repeatedly states that he will not divulge operational secrecy.

There is also video evidence of Lemon and 3 "agitators" obstructing the pastor when he stated that he needed to look after his congregation and family (see links I posted upthread in the past 2 pages).

"Lemon started livestreaming and told the audience he was with a group gearing up for a “resistance” operation against federal immigration policies, according to the document. Lemon “took steps to maintain operational secrecy by reminding co-conspirators to not disclose the target of their operation,” the indictment says, and stepped away so his microphone would not accidentally divulge the planning.

During the briefing before the operation, prosecutors say, Lemon thanked Nekima Levy Armstrong, a prominent local activist who is among the nine indicted, for what she was doing and assured her he was not saying what was going on."

Former CNN anchor Don Lemon arrested, lawyer says

Journalist Don Lemon and three other people were arrested Friday in connection with an anti-immigration enforcement protest that disrupted a service at a Minnesota church and increased tensions between residents and U.S. federal officials.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

My understanding of the First Amendment is that, regarding:

• Religion - protects the right to practice religion freely
• Press - ensure the freedom of news media to report without government censorship

Only half correct. It also protects the press against government retaliation, which is what I (and many others) consider this to be.

ACLU and ACLU of Minnesota React to the Trump Administration's Arrests of Journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort | American Civil Liberties Union

If the resistance operation will foreseeably cause psychological injury, is the press given a pass to document the intent to cause unjustified harm and the resulting trauma?

SBMFF. There's the trauma again. Who determines who experiences trauma and who doesn't. Again, not every adverse event causes trauma. It's become a buzz word to talk about any behavior we don't like and we should probably be more thoughtful about using it in general, IMO.

But assuming your question was accurate, the answer is yes. The press has a pass to document what is happening. That's why they were able to cover 9/11 (which was traumatizing to many). They photograph plane crashes and even dead bodies. They cover crime scenes and yes, sometimes they cover crimes in progress if they're there when it happens. That's how you get the Kent State photo that's infamous around the globe.

To suggest that isn't already the role of a free press in America is inaccurate.

MOO.

 

[otto]

Only half correct. It also protects the press against government retaliation, which is what I (and many others) consider this to be.

ACLU and ACLU of Minnesota React to the Trump Administration's Arrests of Journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort | American Civil Liberties Union



SBMFF. There's the trauma again. Who determines who experiences trauma and who doesn't. Again, not every adverse event causes trauma. It's become a buzz word to talk about any behavior we don't like and we should probably be more thoughtful about using it in general, IMO.

But assuming your question was accurate, the answer is yes. The press has a pass to document what is happening. That's why they were able to cover 9/11 (which was traumatizing to many). They photograph plane crashes and even dead bodies. They cover crime scenes and yes, sometimes they cover crimes in progress if they're there when it happens. That's how you get the Kent State photo that's infamous around the globe.

To suggest that isn't already the role of a free press in America is inaccurate.

MOO.

Regarding the use of the word "trauma", that is the word used by the professional journalists to describe the protest in the church.

Does the question then become: is the government silencing an independent journalist who is allegedly obstructing a pastor that wants to comfort his congregation and family, or is the independent journalist documenting the agitators who are obstruct the pastor?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Hypothetically, if the resistance operation was to cause physical harm (rather than psychological harm) to a religious group practicing religion, and a journalist attended pre-op planning, then the journalist is within his rights to accompany the resistance operation to the location of the intended operation to film the traumatic event and interview the injured about the experience?

Yes, actually. If the reporter knew ahead of time the plan was to harm individuals, then he could potentially be charged with conspiracy, but Lemon wasn't charged with this, likely because they can't prove he knew the plan ahead of time. But if the reporter just showed up to the crime scene or followed the group to the crime scene, the reporter can absolutely film the traumatic event and interview the injured about the experience.

The independent journalist is within his rights to ignore injury while getting the story?

Yes. 100%. If you've ever seen a report about a car crash and seen a reporter not helping, you know this is true. The coverage of war zones that we see on our television are from reporters in the field getting video and photographs, not of them lending a hand to those who are injured, either psychologically or physically. Their job is to REPORT, not help.

The independent journalist is within his rights to "obstruct" the leader whose role it is to comfort the injured?

Where and when did he obstruct? Is there evidence of this that we've seen? Because I haven't seen it from the clips of his livestream that I saw.

MOO.

 

[otto]

Yes, actually. If the reporter knew ahead of time the plan was to harm individuals, then he could potentially be charged with conspiracy, but Lemon wasn't charged with this, likely because they can't prove he knew the plan ahead of time. But if the reporter just showed up to the crime scene or followed the group to the crime scene, the reporter can absolutely film the traumatic event and interview the injured about the experience.



Yes. 100%. If you've ever seen a report about a car crash and seen a reporter not helping, you know this is true. The coverage of war zones that we see on our television are from reporters in the field getting video and photographs, not of them lending a hand to those who are injured, either psychologically or physically. Their job is to REPORT, not help.



Where and when did he obstruct? Is there evidence of this that we've seen? Because I haven't seen it from the clips of his livestream that I saw.

MOO.

The evidence in support of the affidavit and indictment is not restricted to the youtube video published by the independent journalist. Additional footage, per the affidavit, is used to justify the charge of obstruction against Don Lemon.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

The question is not whether an independent journalist has a responsibility to render aid, but whether an independent journalist has a responsibility to not obstruct those whose role it is to render aid.

SBMFF.

Actually, your question was "The independent journalist is within his rights to ignore injury while getting the story?" That's what some of us are answering.

And given that there is no evidence he obstructed anything, I think it's the more relevant question of the two. Show me evidence of obstruction and maybe I'll have a different answer, but from the video clips I've seen, he couldn't have been more calm and collected as he interviewed people and never physically obstructed anyone.

MOO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

The evidence in support of the affidavit and indictment is not restricted to the youtube video published by the independent journalist. Additional footage, per the affidavit, is used to justify the charge of obstruction against Don Lemon.

So as I said, is there evidence that we've seen? Because I think it's a lie, frankly. Two separate judges dismissed this and refused to sign the warrant for a reason.

MOO.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Yes, actually. If the reporter knew ahead of time the plan was to harm individuals, then he could potentially be charged with conspiracy, but Lemon wasn't charged with this, likely because they can't prove he knew the plan ahead of time.

Except, Lemon is in fact charged with that. It's the first count listed on the indictment.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2026/01/CASE-026-cr-00025-LMP-DLM.pdf