Minnesota AG Ellison rejects claims that Don Lemon and anti-ICE protesters broke federal law

ST PAUL, MINNESOTA: Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison is brushing off claims that anti-ICE protesters and liberal media figure Don Lemon crossed a legal line when they disrupted a church service in his state over the weekend, even as the Justice Department weighs potential federal charges.

The controversy stems from a protest on Sunday, January 18, inside St Paul’s Cities Church, where demonstrators disrupted a worship service to protest the conduct of a religious leader.

Senior DOJ officials subsequently confirmed they are reviewing whether the demonstrators violated two federal statutes, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act.

Ellison, however, says that interpretation doesn’t pass the smell test.

DOJ reviews FACE Act, KKK Act after church disruption

Justice Department officials have said they are examining whether the protesters’ actions inside the church violated federal civil rights laws, including the FACE Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act.

The FACE Act makes it a federal crime to use or threaten force to “injure, intimidate, or interfere” with individuals seeking reproductive health services, or with a person lawfully exercising their First Amendment right to religious freedom at a place of worship.

The law also prohibits intentional property damage to reproductive health facilities or houses of religious worship and carries significant fines and potential jail time.

The Ku Klux Klan Act, meanwhile, makes it a federal offense for individuals to conspire to deny citizens their civil rights.

Ellison says FACE Act doesn’t apply to church protests

Ellison argued that applying those laws to what occurred at Cities Church is a stretch.

Appearing on former CNN host Don Lemon’s YouTube show, Ellison argued that the FACE Act was never intended to cover protests like the one.

“And the FACE Act, by the way, is designed to protect the rights of people seeking reproductive rights... so that people for a religious reason cannot just use religion to break into women’s reproductive health centers,” Ellison told Lemon.

Ellison said he’s baffled by the DOJ’s legal theory.

“How they are stretching either of these laws to apply to people who protested in a church over the behavior of a religious leader is beyond me,” he added.

Don Lemon faces scrutiny over embedded coverage

Lemon became a central figure in the controversy after embedding with protesters and providing live coverage from inside Cities Church during the disruption. He has insisted he was acting as a journalist and that his actions are protected by the First Amendment.

Justice Department’s Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon disrupted the claim, arguing that houses of worship are not public forums for protest and are protected by federal law.

“A house of worship is not a public forum for your protest!” Dhillon told Lemon on X. “It is a space protected from exactly such acts by federal criminal and civil laws! Nor does the First Amendment protect your pseudo journalism of disrupting a prayer service.” She added, “You are on notice."

Dhillon doubled down during an interview with conservative influencer Benny Johnson, arguing that Lemon’s own statements could undercut his defense. She said journalism is not a “shield” from criminal liability.

“Don Lemon himself has come out and said he knew exactly what was going to happen inside that facility,” Dhillon said on “The Benny Show.” “He went into the facility, and then he began — quote, unquote — ‘committing journalism,’ as if that’s sort of a shield from being a part, an embedded part, of a criminal conspiracy. It isn’t.” 

Lemon responds 

Lemon pushed back in a statement to Fox News, rejecting claims that he played a leading role in the protest.

“It’s notable that I’ve been cast as the face of a protest I was covering as a journalist — especially since I wasn’t the only reporter there. That framing is telling,” Lemon said.

He also claimed he has faced a wave of threats since the incident. “What’s even more telling is the barrage of violent threats, along with homophobic and racist slurs, directed at me online by MAGA supporters and amplified by parts of the right-wing press,” Lemon added.

Lemon dismissed the outrage as misplaced and accused critics of ignoring the underlying issue that sparked the protest.

“If this much time and energy is going to be spent manufacturing outrage, it would be far better used investigating the tragic death of Renee Nicole Good— the very issue that brought people into the streets in the first place,” he continued, adding, “I stand by my reporting."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.