Minnesota officials have apparently discovered a fascinating new legal principle: if activists storm a church service screaming about immigration policy, it magically transforms from disruption into “peaceful protest.”
That’s the message critics took away this week after local prosecutors declined to bring state charges against dozens of anti-ICE demonstrators — including former CNN personality Don Lemon — who barged into a Minnesota church during worship services earlier this year.
The chaotic January incident already sparked federal civil-rights charges against 39 people. But according to St. Paul City Attorney Irene Kao, Minnesota prosecutors simply don’t believe there’s enough evidence to pursue violations under state law.
Yes, really.
𝐃𝐎𝐙𝐄𝐍𝐒 𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐒𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐌𝐄𝐃 𝐀 𝐒𝐓 𝐏𝐀𝐔𝐋 𝐂𝐇𝐔𝐑𝐂𝐇 𝐃𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐒𝐔𝐍𝐃𝐀𝐘 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐅𝐀𝐂𝐄 𝐍𝐎 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐆𝐄𝐒, 𝐏𝐑𝐎𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐔𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐒 𝐒𝐀𝐘
In January, a mob of anti-ICE protesters 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐒𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐭… pic.twitter.com/RnrElrBnPz
— M.A. Rothman (@MichaelARothman) June 4, 2026
In a statement released Wednesday, Kao insisted the “current evidence is insufficient to meet that standard for criminal charges under Minnesota state statutes” tied to the Jan. 18 church takeover.
She added: “This decision should not be interpreted as an endorsement of unlawful behavior or public disorder.”
Except that’s exactly how many people interpreted it.
Kao attempted to frame the decision as a balancing act between protest rights and religious liberty.
“The right to peacefully protest is protected, as is the right to exercise one’s religious beliefs. Balancing these equally important rights is paramount to our decision today,” she said.
The problem, critics argue, is that barging into a worship service and disrupting religious gatherings doesn’t exactly resemble the peaceful-protest imagery politicians usually invoke during press conferences.
And nobody sounded more furious than Cities Church lead pastor Jonathan Parnell, whose congregation became the target of the anti-ICE demonstration.
“The city of Saint Paul has officially determined the January 18 invasion of our church and the desecration of our worship to be a ‘peaceful protest,’” Parnell said in a video posted online.
According to the city attorney’s logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, a cathedral, or a temple, shout in people’s faces, terrorize their children, and shut down their religious gathering.
Just call it a “protest.”
That is the kind of city Kaohly Her… https://t.co/hJLu7lQNgQ
— Jonathan Parnell (@jonathanparnell) June 3, 2026
Then he delivered the question many conservatives immediately started asking.
“According to the St. Paul City Attorney’s logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, a cathedral, or a temple, intimidate the families and children inside, and shut down their religious gathering. Just call it a ‘protest,’” he added.
That’s the double-standard argument now exploding across social media and conservative circles: would authorities react the same way if activists stormed a mosque during Friday prayers or disrupted another politically favored religious group?
Federal prosecutors clearly viewed the incident differently than Minnesota officials did.
The Trump administration charged 39 participants with federal civil-rights violations related to interfering with religious freedom at a place of worship.
Among those charged were Lemon, activist Nekima Levy Armstrong and journalist Georgia Fort.
The charges include conspiracy against religious freedom and interfering with the exercise of religious freedom — not exactly the legal language normally associated with harmless demonstrations.
The protest centered around claims involving Cities Church resident pastor David Eastwood, whom activists accused of simultaneously serving as an acting ICE field office director.
But what truly blew apart Lemon’s insistence that he was “just reporting” on the event was his own livestream footage.
The former CNN anchor broadcast the operation in real time, including scenes beforehand where he appeared to coordinate with activists in a nearby parking lot while carefully avoiding revealing operational details publicly.
“They’re planning an operation we’re going to follow them on,” Lemon said during the stream.
“I can’t tell you exactly what they’re doing, but it’s called Operation Pull-Up.”
That’s not exactly the language most people associate with detached journalism.
“So that’s what we’re doing here,” Lemon continued. “After we do this operation, you’ll see it live, these operations are surprise operations. Again, I can’t tell you where they’re going.”
Critics say the footage made Lemon look less like a reporter and more like an embedded participant helping hype up the stunt before it unfolded.
Days later, FBI agents arrested Lemon at a Los Angeles hotel.
The once-prominent CNN host has spent years reinventing himself as an anti-Trump media activist after flaming out at the network following a series of controversies and on-air embarrassments. Now he finds himself facing federal allegations tied to a church disruption case that conservatives argue would have triggered national outrage had the political roles been reversed.
And that’s the larger point fueling backlash.
