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

[SouthAussie]

If he was there during pre case discussion its a conflict of interest.

He wasn't.


Thompson and others left the office roughly a week after Good’s death, a few days before Lemon and protesters entered Cities Church.

Don Lemon hires former federal prosecutor who resigned over handling of fatal ICE shooting probe

By Whitney Wild, CNN (CNN) — Former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who faces several charges related to his coverage of a protest at a St. Paul church last month, has hired a prominent former Minnesota federal prosecutor to represent him, according to court records filed Tuesday. That lawyer, Joseph H...

kesq.com

 

[J. J. in Phila]

He wasn't.


Thompson and others left the office roughly a week after Good’s death, a few days before Lemon and protesters entered Cities Church.

Don Lemon hires former federal prosecutor who resigned over handling of fatal ICE shooting probe

By Whitney Wild, CNN (CNN) — Former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who faces several charges related to his coverage of a protest at a St. Paul church last month, has hired a prominent former Minnesota federal prosecutor to represent him, according to court records filed Tuesday. That lawyer, Joseph H...

kesq.com

That is when he submitted his resignation, not necessarily the last day he was there. It is traditional to give 2 weeks notice. We don't know his last day,

MOO

 

[Inthedetails]

He wasn't.


Thompson and others left the office roughly a week after Good’s death, a few days before Lemon and protesters entered Cities Church.

Don Lemon hires former federal prosecutor who resigned over handling of fatal ICE shooting probe

By Whitney Wild, CNN (CNN) — Former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who faces several charges related to his coverage of a protest at a St. Paul church last month, has hired a prominent former Minnesota federal prosecutor to represent him, according to court records filed Tuesday. That lawyer, Joseph H...

kesq.com

This wasn't just some employee announcing a job change or retirement. He was RESIGNING IN PROTEST. The department would make sure he was out of there immediately.

My opinion.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This wasn't just some employee announcing a job change or retirement. He was RESIGNING IN PROTEST. The department would make sure he was out of there immediately.

My opinion.

Not necessarily.

There can be a professional responsibility to give that notice.

MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Whether or not you read them does not mean that the courts won't.

The courts have been skeptical of some sort of special privilege to report (as opposed to disseminate).

MOO.

No, they have not. Ever. It's right there in the Constitution and there is no confusion.

MOO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

As the case law supporting that is what?

Constitutional language that is pretty clearly black and white is not necessarily dependent on case law.

MOO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Constitutional language that is pretty clearly black and white is not necessarily dependent on case law.

MOO.

In other words, there are no SCOTUS precedents backing up the journalist's privilege claim.

MOO.

 

[Hexe]

In other words, there are no SCOTUS precedents backing up the journalist's privilege claim.

MOO.

What does have the journalist's privilege to Don Lemon? He did not claim it in this case.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

What does have the journalist's privilege to Don Lemon? He did not claim it in this case.

MOO

Lemon has claimed that as a journalist, he has a right to, at the very least, go with people committing a crime. Branzburg, previously cited said that a journalist has the same obligation as any other citizen. Since Branzburg was decided, the courts have tended to move away from any kind of First Amendment privilege for reporters in reporting. SCOTUS was at least slightly more liberal that it is today.

As soon as anyone says "First Amendment" they are making a privilege claim.

MOO.

 

[Ruminations]

When a journalist is doing journalism, they are not invoking a special privilege. They are doing journalism.

There is no such thing as a "journalism privilege" to claim in public.

Sometimes, some populations have privileges to not testify in courts. Spousal privilege, right to not self-incriminate, and, in the case of reporters, a privilege to not reveal sources.

Reporter's privilege is entirely irrelevant to this case. I know I'm not the first to say this.

My suggestion is we all agree to stop bringing up the irrelevant reporters privilege in this thread, because it does not apply and is not being claimed, not to mention there is no court case or preparatory depositions to prepare for one, where privileges might be applied.

If this case ever goes to trial, a stretch, then i don't see hints yet that there will be an instance where the journalists will invoke a right to protect sources. AFAIK, the sources and tips were things like Instagram. Hardly a secret.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

Lemon has claimed that as a journalist, he has a right to, at the very least, go with people committing a crime. Branzburg, previously cited said that a journalist has the same obligation as any other citizen. Since Branzburg was decided, the courts have tended to move away from any kind of First Amendment privilege for reporters in reporting. SCOTUS was at least slightly more liberal that it is today.

As soon as anyone says "First Amendment" they are making a privilege claim.

MOO.

Im glad you indicated this is your opinion, but it certainly is not a fact.

IMO, there is absolutely no reason to even begin to imagine that Don Lemon said to himself, "I am a reporter, so I am going to go with people committing a crime." What would make you think that is how he started the day?

A protest is a very legit thing to cover, and protesting is not a crime.

Harassment, trespassing, and maybe even violating the FACE act ( which the current Trump administration is trying to gut) are potential crimes*** at the church in retrospect only. But protests do not generally involve any of those things. Why would Lemon or any journalist assume one of these crimes would be committed?

MOO


*************

***Personally, I don't think any of those charges can stick to any of the protesters except maybe trespassing or harassment IF THE SAME STUNT is repeated. FACE, the only charge brought, probably because it's federal and the Federal government was motivated, even eager, to charge, is a heavy lift. The FACE charge is tough because I don't see force, but if it goes to trial, it's for the jury to decide.

State probably didn't even have time to decide if it should move forward with State charges.

Behavior in bad taste is not necessarily a crime.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Lemon had to know that when he entered the church, since it was for an action and not prayer. That is obvious.

MOO.

 

[Ruminations]

Lemon had to know that when he entered the church, since it was for an action and not prayer. That is obvious.

MOO.

No.

Not obvious.

If my pastor was involved in criminal, extrajudicial killings, I'd thank the new person in the pews bringing it to my attention.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

No.

Not obvious.

If my pastor was involved in criminal, extrajudicial killings, I'd thank the new person in the pews bringing it to my attention.

MOO

This is not about any killings nor what you would do. This is about Lemon's violation of the rights of others, which constituted a criminal act.

Lemon was not blindfolded. He knew that the purpose was "an action." It is obvious that he knew.

MOO.

 

[Hexe]

Lemon has claimed that as a journalist, he has a right to, at the very least, go with people committing a crime.

Provide me the exact quote when he said this.
Also, that's not what the journalist's privilege is.

Branzburg, previously cited said that a journalist has the same obligation as any other citizen.

Branzburg, you say...

In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Supreme Court considered three consolidated cases determining whether there is a constitutionally based privilege in the First Amendment that permits reporters to refuse to testify before a grand jury.

Was Don Lemon in that church testifying in front of the grand jury?

soon as anyone says "First Amendment" they are making a privilege claim.

So you say the congregation members from the church where the protest took place claimed a privilege?
Interesting take.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Provide me the exact quote when he said this.
Also, that's not what the journalist's privilege is.



Branzburg, you say...



Was Don Lemon in that church testifying in front of the grand jury?



So you say the congregation members from the church where the protest took place claimed a privilege?
Interesting take.

MOO

The actual court's opinion has been linked, not some summary or spin.

Here is part of what Branzburg vs. Hayes really said:

"We do not question the significance of free speech, press, or assembly to the country's welfare. Nor is it suggested that news gathering does not qualify for First Amendment protection; without some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated. But these cases involve no intrusions upon speech or assembly, no prior restraint or restriction on what the press may publish, and no express or implied command that the press publish what it prefers to withhold."

Emphasis added. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/408/665/

As soon as "First Amendment" is raised, and Lemon uses it in the context of "journalism" is claiming a privilege.

No, I say that it violates statute. That statement is based on the First Amendment. There is no statute that covers a journalist being able to enter an area. The courts have not established

MOO.

 

[Ruminations]

This is not about any killings nor what you would do. This is about Lemon's violation of the rights of others, which constituted a criminal act.

Lemon was not blindfolded. He knew that the purpose was "an action." It is obvious that he knew.

MOO.

Gotcha. So we agree.

Actions are legal.

He was covering an action.

What's the problem?

MOO