The sanctuary of a church, a space traditionally reserved for solace and worship, was shattered last Sunday. A group of protesters stormed into Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, disrupting services and targeting congregants, all stemming from allegations against the pastor regarding ties to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Among those present was Don Lemon, a former CNN anchor, who shockingly defended the intrusion. He asserted a First Amendment right to trespass, disrupt, and even target individuals based on perceived affiliations – a claim that flies in the face of established legal precedent and common decency.
This incident isn’t isolated. It echoes a disturbing pattern, recalling the passage of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act in 1994. Originally intended to protect access to abortion clinics, the law was broadened to include houses of worship, recognizing the fundamental right to practice religion without intimidation.
The FACE Act has been vigorously enforced in recent years, with the previous administration pursuing felony charges and lengthy prison sentences against pro-life protesters. Yet, a stark double standard appears to exist. Instances of left-leaning activists disrupting religious services or targeting pro-life centers have often met with silence or even tacit approval.
Consider the case of Paulette Harlow, a 75-year-old woman imprisoned for two years for protesting at an abortion clinic. Or Bevelyn Williams, a young Black mother sentenced to 41 months for similar actions. These punishments stand in stark contrast to the apparent leniency afforded to those who stormed the church in Minnesota.
The actions at Cities Church weren’t simply a protest; they were a direct violation of the FACE Act and potentially the Ku Klux Klan Act, which prohibits conspiracies to violate civil rights. The protesters’ sudden incursion, the fear instilled in worshippers – including children – and Lemon’s direct engagement with parishioners created a volatile and threatening environment.
The First Amendment does not grant a license to disrupt the religious practices of others. A church is private property, and individuals have the right to worship freely without fear of intimidation. Allowing such intrusions would open the door to chaos, where any group could disrupt any service based on their grievances.
Imagine protesters storming synagogues during services, or mosques, or any place of worship. The potential for escalating conflict and the erosion of fundamental rights are immense. Lemon’s legal reasoning is not only flawed but dangerously irresponsible.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s response – that “none of us are immune from the voice of the public” – is a hollow justification for unlawful behavior. Would he extend the same tolerance if a group disrupted a mosque service? The hypocrisy is glaring.
Lemon’s claim of being a journalist merely observing the event doesn’t absolve him of responsibility. The same argument was rejected in the aftermath of the January 6th Capitol riot. Journalists are not exempt from the law, and trespassing is still a crime.
The situation in Minnesota is a symptom of a larger problem: a descent into lawlessness fueled by inflammatory rhetoric and a perceived lack of accountability. Rampant fraud and anti-ICE sentiment have created an environment where extremist actions are emboldened.
Those who stormed the church, particularly Don Lemon, must be held accountable. Indictments are necessary not only to punish the perpetrators but to send a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated. The sanctity of religious freedom, and the rule of law itself, are at stake.
This isn’t about politics; it’s about protecting a fundamental right – the right to worship without fear. It’s about upholding the law and ensuring that all citizens, regardless of their beliefs, can exercise their freedoms without intimidation or violence.
