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

[Rolypolyoly]

I already have. Refusing to leave and disrupting the service.

MOO.

As far as I am aware he did neither of those things.

I'm getting dizzy from this going round in circles

 

[Ruminations]

The grand jury, which may have had more time and more evidence, found that evidence.

MOO.

What other journalists have been targeted?

Well, that is debatable.

They didn't have much time on the case.

Lemons lawyers are requesting the GJ transcripts because it appears the GJ was given bad facts, bad law, and/or bad instructions.

The judges who declined to permit an arrest of Lemon did not see probable cause, and there isn't reason at this time to think the GJ knows something the judges do not.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

As far as I am aware he did neither of those things.

I'm getting dizzy from this going round in circles

IIRC, Lemon being ask to leave is on his own live stream. Likewise by peppering the pastor with questions, blocking him, that disrupted the service.

MOO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well, that is debatable.

They didn't have much time on the case.

Lemons lawyers are requesting the GJ transcripts because it appears the GJ was given bad facts, bad law, and/or bad instructions.

The judges who declined to permit an arrest of Lemon did not see probable cause, and there isn't reason at this time to think the GJ knows something the judges do not.

MOO

In other words, there are no other journalists targeted. Got it.

Again, grand juries have more time and usually more evidence.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

The two judges are not the issue.

A grand jury determined it.

MOO

The GJ is suspect in this case. The reasons for thinking this GJ indictment is flawed are compelling.

Please read the motion to release the transcripts.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

In other words, there are no other journalists targeted. Got it.

Again, grand juries have more time and usually more evidence.

MOO

Not usually, but sometimes.

It can be a solid prosecution strategy to use the GJ over time to collect and preserve evidence and testimony.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this particular GJ met a moment longer than necessary to sign a paper.

Read the motion to release the transcripts about THIS GJ, and stop bringing up what you think usually happens.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The GJ is suspect in this case. The reasons for thinking this GJ indictment is flawed are compelling.

Please read the motion to release the transcripts.

MOO

The grand jury sits for a term, as a rule; they are not picked for a specific case: Rule 6. The Grand Jury

It isunlikely that this grand jury is "suspect."

I have read the motion and there appears to be nothing related to being suspect. IMO

Since one poster thinks it is, can he articulate it.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Okay.

It was not a "good idea." In your opinion.

But, according to two judges so far, he didn't appear to break any laws.

MOO

In my opinion Don Lemon knew it was something he shouldn’t be doing.

During the livestream, as they arrive at the church, he says -“I don’t think we can go inside, right”? (he answers his own question) “No, no, no, no, no. We can stand outside.”. (23:35)

imo moo

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Not usually, but sometimes.

It can be a solid prosecution strategy to use the GJ over time to collect and preserve evidence and testimony.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this particular GJ met a moment longer than necessary to sign a paper.

Read the motion to release the transcripts about THIS GJ, and stop bringing up what you think usually happens.

MOO

The indictment shows additional evidence.

IMO.

 

[Rolypolyoly]

IIRC, Lemon being ask to leave is on his own live stream. Likewise by peppering the pastor with questions, blocking him, that disrupted the service.

MOO.

Did you hear him refuse to leave?

I didnt see Lemon blocking the Pastor from moving away from him, he wasnt blocking the aisle, not obstructing the Pastor in any way. The Pastor did walk away didnt he?

The service was stopped, Lemon didnt cause the disruption, he interviewed people in the aftermath of it.

In other words, there are no other journalists targeted. Got it.

Again, grand juries have more time and usually more evidence.

MOO

Apart from the other named journalist that was also arrested and charged in this case you mean?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Did you hear him refuse to leave?

I didnt see Lemon blocking the Pastor from moving away from him, he wasnt blocking the aisle, not obstructing the Pastor in any way. The Pastor did walk away didnt he?

The service was stopped, Lemon didnt cause the disruption, he interviewed people in the aftermath of it.



Apart from the other named journalist that was also arrested and charged in this case you mean?

No, I watched him stay.

The service could have continued, but Lemon's interference helped prevent that.

We have two reporters, working together, in the same incident. Where are the others?

MOO

 

[Cryptic]

We are talking about the journalists' arrests on this thread. And the ACLU is not a fan of their arrests.

But you brought up your belief that convicting the protesters would be difficult.

The ACLU is not contesting the applicability of the charges to the protesters.

 

[Cryptic]

Lemon was unlawfully in the church, being part of the disruption. No one can do that, including a journalist.

I think this is going to squeeze Lemon and also why only two journalists- one of whom was there only because Lemon was there covered the event.

There were lots of attempted disruptions at Catholic churches following the SCOTUS decision to return abortion to the states.

I don't remember any news service hooking up with protesters in advance, then following them to a Church, then entering to minutes later to conduct interviews. My guess is that there is a reason for that. In the end, this whole thing seems more than a little middle school ala:

CNN News Services: Go Lemon, Go!!! We back you 100% in the way you covered that Church disruption. Heck, you can do it again- if you want.

Hypothetical Quiet voice of Lemons Videographer: So, Uhhmmm..... why were you CNN guys not there? And why have you not done something similar?

CNN News Service: Because you are the punk fall guy (girl), not us.

Hypothetical Videographer question: Will I get a cool, cutting edge legal eagle to defend me? (Best left unanswered)

 

[marloweclover]

Imo -- chronology matters. If we focus only on Lemon until after the service is disrupted, do his individual acts prior to and including that point in time meet the letter of the law? I have not seen evidence to that effect.

 

[SouthAussie]

Those protesters were pardoned by this administration. That shows this administration may be using the statute maliciously, rather than idealistically.

MOO

Yes, this might be part of the defence's case. imo

On the one hand, in this instance, the administration (DOJ) charged protesters and journalists with violating the FACE Act.

And the administration (president) had previously pardoned 23 protesters convicted of FACE Act violations.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Yes, this might be part of the defence's case. imo

On the one hand, in this instance, the administration (DOJ) charged protesters and journalists with violating the FACE Act.

And the administration (president) had previously pardoned 23 protesters convicted of FACE Act violations.

The pardoning is irrelevant to the case; I doubt if it can be introduced. IMO,

 

[Sundog]

The fact that the protestors are ready to justify their actions does not latter. What matters is whether or not they violated the FACE act. Likewise, the fact that the protesters deem the Pastor to be "uncool" is also a non starter.

SBM

Exactly.

 

[Sundog]

Well, that is debatable.

They didn't have much time on the case.

Lemons lawyers are requesting the GJ transcripts because it appears the GJ was given bad facts, bad law, and/or bad instructions.

The judges who declined to permit an arrest of Lemon did not see probable cause, and there isn't reason at this time to think the GJ knows something the judges do not.

MOO

The opinion by the judges wasn't unanimous, two out of the three judges at the Appeal Court level did not see probable cause based on the evidence presented by the government at that time. And the Court suggested that the prosecution take the case to a grand jury. The judges' majority and minority opinions were posted several times upthread.

It was by no means a unanimous opinion and a grand jury option was always on the table, even suggested by the Court.

 

[Sundog]

In my opinion Don Lemon knew it was something he shouldn’t be doing.

During the livestream, as they arrive at the church, he says -“I don’t think we can go inside, right”? (he answers his own question) “No, no, no, no, no. We can stand outside.”. (23:35)

imo moo

Agree, he knew about the FACE Act and decided to violate it in his excitement of the moment. IMO.