The Don Lemon Church Incursion Could Serve As a Tipping Point for the Direction of the Country
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File
Posted For: Rotorblade
There has been intense reaction across social media following an activist stunt that unfolded in St. Paul this weekend involving disgraced former CNN journalist Don Lemon. While online discussion has been heated on both sides, the legacy media has been conspicuously quiet about what occurred on Sunday. Yet the implications of this incident may prove significant for the direction the country is heading.
As previously reported, an organized group affiliated with the Black Lives Matter movement forcibly disrupted a church service under the pretext of protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions in Minnesota. The group alleged that a reverend had ties to ICE. Video footage of the incident paints a disturbing picture, largely due to Don Lemon’s visible involvement and his subsequent efforts to reshape the narrative around his role.
Before the event, Lemon posted enthusiastic videos previewing what was about to happen and promised to livestream the protest. He then joined the group as it entered the church and even conducted an aggressive on-camera exchange with a pastor. This type of behavior fits a pattern for Lemon, who appears eager to regain relevance by provoking controversy and chasing viral attention. However, once public backlash set in, his story quickly changed.
INTENT: The opening to Don Lemon’s insane livestream is an admission of foreknowledge that the group he was in contact with was going to storm a church, based on his prior communications with its leader. pic.twitter.com/g0GVHB4871
— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 19, 2026
As critics began pointing out that the disruption may have violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act—a federal law that protects access to health clinics and places of worship—Lemon shifted tactics. He claimed he was merely present as a journalist and had no advance knowledge of the protest. That assertion is difficult to reconcile with his earlier posts, which clearly promoted the event and acknowledged those who organized it.
Further complicating Lemon’s defense, RedState’s Bonchie noted that the woman who coordinated the church intrusion publicly thanked individuals involved in the planning—and Don Lemon was among those she praised.
What makes this incident especially consequential is the possibility that it involved the commission of a federal crime. Given the seriousness of the allegations, accountability is essential. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon and the Department of Justice are reportedly examining the matter and considering potential charges against those involved, including Lemon. If the law applies, enforcement is necessary; failing to act would only embolden further lawlessness. This is not alarmism—what occurred on Sunday raises genuine legal concerns.
She just…posted everyone involved.
And then PINNED it to her profile. Incredible. pic.twitter.com/nukgJ5JZgd
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) January 19, 2026
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, however, has publicly stated that he sees no crime and has even encouraged similar actions. That position is remarkable coming from the state’s top law enforcement officer. The day after the incident, Ellison appeared alongside Lemon and made an astonishing claim: that the FACE Act is meant solely to protect access to “reproductive rights” and applies only to healthcare clinics. “How they are stretching these laws to people protesting in a church is beyond me,” Ellison said.
But the law’s text is unambiguous. The FACE Act explicitly includes places of religious worship. Its language clearly prohibits intimidation or interference with individuals exercising their First Amendment right to religious freedom in a place of worship.
To be precise, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 amended federal criminal law to prohibit intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with any person exercising religious freedom at a place of worship through force, threats, or physical obstruction. Under 18 U.S.C. § 248(a)(2), such actions carry criminal penalties, including imprisonment.
MN Attorney General Keith Ellison: “The FACE Act is designed to protect the rights of people seeking reproductive rights… How they are stretching these laws to people protesting in a church is beyond me.”
The FACE Act specifically says that you can’t use intimidation to… pic.twitter.com/auEJvZcOQX
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 19, 2026
Ellison’s refusal to acknowledge this plain language is telling. His stance appears less about legal interpretation and more about shielding Lemon and the activists involved. That suspicion is heightened by the fact that Ellison was seen speaking with Lemon on the day of the church disruption, suggesting prior communication about the event.
Ellison is not alone among local officials turning a blind eye. Investigative reporter Luke Rosiak revealed that a senior staffer for Hennepin County’s Soros-backed prosecutor was also present—and actively participating—in the protest. Jamael Lundy, the intergovernmental affairs coordinator for Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, was among the group that entered the church. Lundy is married to a St. Paul City Council member and is currently running for state legislature as a Democrat.
This level of permissiveness toward lawless behavior by political leaders marks a dangerous turning point. If Lemon and his activist allies escape consequences, it will likely encourage even more aggressive and unlawful actions in the future.
Even when barriers are put in our way, my team and I stay focused on seeking justice and accountability for our communities.
Grateful to Don Lemon for being on the ground in Minnesota to help lift up this fight for truth and fairness. pic.twitter.com/AAFxj7Y8a0
— Keith Ellison (@keithellison) January 18, 2026
Across the country, legal standards are being tested daily, from open defiance of federal authorities to political leaders encouraging noncompliance with federal law. From sanctuary policies to outright obstruction of immigration enforcement, those who claim to defend democracy are actively undermining it.
Now lawmakers are denying the existence—or applicability—of clear federal statutes and may even be complicit in their violation. If this situation is not addressed swiftly and decisively, mob rule will only accelerate. Don Lemon and those who stormed the church must be held publicly accountable. Perhaps then the media will finally confront the illegality of what occurred, and the politicians enabling this behavior will be forced to answer for it.
About Post Author
You must be logged in to post a comment.