What should have been a quiet Sunday morning of worship in St. Paul, Minnesota, devolved into chaos after a mob of anti-ICE activists stormed a church service—an incident now drawing the attention of the Trump Justice Department and raising serious questions about religious freedom, lawlessness, and media activism masquerading as journalism.
The disruption occurred at City Church in St. Paul, where protesters—reportedly led and amplified by disgraced former CNN host Don Lemon—interrupted a live worship service, shouting accusations that the church’s pastor had cooperated with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The outburst comes amid ongoing riots and unrest tied to the death of Renee Nicole Good, who was fatally shot by an ICE agent during a violent protest in Minneapolis.
Now, the Department of Justice under President Trump is stepping in. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon announced that the DOJ is reviewing whether the incident violated federal civil rights statutes, including the FACE Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act—laws designed to protect Americans from intimidation, coercion, and interference with their constitutional rights, including the free exercise of religion.
“A house of worship is not a public forum for your protest,” Dhillon wrote bluntly 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. You are on notice.”
Minnesota’s Democrat Attorney General Keith Ellison rushed to downplay the incident, dismissing the DOJ’s concerns during an appearance on Don Lemon’s YouTube show. Ellison falsely claimed the FACE Act applies only to abortion clinics, arguing that its use in this case was a stretch. That claim is incorrect. The FACE Act explicitly protects religious worship and prohibits the use of force, threats, or obstruction against people exercising religious freedom.
“How they are stretching either of these laws to apply to people who protested in a church is beyond me,” Ellison said—an astonishing comment to many legal observers, given the clear language of federal statutes and the video evidence showing worshippers being harassed during prayer.
Don Lemon, for his part, insisted he was merely “covering” the protest as a journalist, despite footage showing him embedded with the activists as they disrupted the service. “It’s notable that I’ve been cast as the face of a protest I was covering as a journalist,” Lemon complained, once again casting himself as the victim.
He went on to allege that criticism of his actions amounted to “manufactured outrage” and claimed he had received online threats—while ignoring the very real intimidation experienced by churchgoers whose service was hijacked by a political mob.
The pastor at the center of the controversy, however, painted a very different picture, describing the incident as blatant intimidation and a violation of sacred space.
Dhillon was unequivocal in her response. “The Klan Act is one of the most important federal civil rights statutes we have,” she said, noting it was specifically designed to stop mobs from terrorizing citizens and denying them their rights. “Journalism is not a shield when you are involved in a crime,” she added, warning that those who conspire to disrupt religious worship could face severe consequences.
As the DOJ investigation moves forward, the incident has become a stark illustration of how far radical activism—and its media enablers—are willing to go. For many Americans, the question is simple: if churches aren’t safe from political mobs, what is?
