Close Menu

Don Lemon’s Church Invasion May Just Be A Tipping Point In America

Updated: LAW & COURT

There has been a great deal of buzz—both celebratory and outraged—over the activist stunt that unfolded in St. Paul this weekend featuring disgraced former CNN personality Don Lemon. Social media has been on fire over his role in the spectacle, dissecting every clip and quote, while the legacy media, true to form, has gone conspicuously quiet about what actually happened.

That silence is telling. When one of their own stumbles into a politically inconvenient mess, the mainstream press suddenly discovers the virtues of restraint and selective blindness. But make no mistake: what happened Sunday may prove to be far more than a fleeting viral moment.

As we previously reported, an organized group from the Black Lives Matter movement gathered on Sunday to disrupt a church service in the city, claiming to protest ICE actions in Minnesota due to an alleged connection between a reverend and the agency. The scene was unsettling, as captured on video, largely thanks to Lemon, who soon started to twist the narrative surrounding his involvement.

After first posting giddy little teaser clips about what was about to happen, Don Lemon promised to stream the whole spectacle live from his account. He eagerly embedded himself with the mob inside the church, even cornering a pastor for a hectoring, self-important interview—classic Lemon behavior in a desperate grab for relevance. It was the same tired routine he’s been running since CNN cut him loose: chase outrage, manufacture drama, hope something goes viral, and maybe—just maybe—resurrect a career that’s been flatlining.

But it didn’t take long before reality intruded. Almost immediately, Lemon began quietly massaging his narrative, softening edges, re-framing events, and repositioning himself as something less like an instigator and more like a misunderstood observer.

Once the backlash started rolling in, a far more serious problem surfaced: the mob stunt inside the church may have violated the FACE Act, the federal law meant to protect access to health clinics and places of worship. That’s when Don Lemon’s posture suddenly changed.

Almost overnight, the swagger vanished. Now he wasn’t an eager participant—oh no—he was just an innocent “journalistic observer” who supposedly had no advance knowledge of what was going to happen.

But here’s the problem for Don.

Enjoying our conservative news and commentary? Make sure you share and tell your friends about us!

There he was on video beforehand, hyping the stunt, advertising what would take place, and openly identifying the activists who had planned it. That’s not accidental presence—that’s foreknowledge and participation. You don’t accidentally livestream a coordinated trespass into a church.

Reports indicate that the woman who orchestrated the church attack acknowledged everyone involved in her planning, including Don Lemon, whom she praised.

What makes Sunday’s so-called “protest” genuinely consequential isn’t the theatrics—it’s the very real possibility that a federal crime was committed. The seriousness of that cannot be brushed aside, and it demands full accountability. Now, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon and the U.S. Department of Justice are reportedly moving quickly to examine the group’s actions—including those of Don Lemon himself—and potentially bring charges.

Assuming the law applies—and from the public evidence, it very well may—this is not optional. Lax enforcement here would send a green light to every activist mob in the country: trespass, intimidate, disrupt worship, and nothing will happen. That’s not alarmism. That’s how lawlessness spreads—when early violations go unanswered and become a template for the next stunt.

And then there’s Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who somehow managed to make this even worse. Ellison publicly announced that he sees no crime at all—and astonishingly, that he encourages more of this behavior.

Let that sink in. The state’s top law-enforcement officer is openly endorsing mob action inside churches.

Ellison followed that up the very next day by appearing alongside Don Lemon—likely sensing the legal storm brewing—and delivered an absolutely astonishing claim. Minnesota’s top law-enforcement officer declared that the FACE Act is meant only to protect people seeking “reproductive rights,” as if the statute somehow applies exclusively to abortion clinics and nowhere else.

“How they are stretching these laws to people protesting in a church is beyond me,” Ellison scoffed.

That statement is breathtaking in its cynicism. The FACE Act plainly covers places of worship, not just healthcare facilities—and Ellison knows it.

The FACE Act specifically says that you can’t use intimidation to interfere with one’s religious freedom in a place of worship.

Here’s the exact language of the act:

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 – Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit: (2) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship.

Specifically, 18 U.S.C. §248(a)(2) subjects anyone engaged in the following to criminal penalties, including imprisonment:

…by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship….

Go read it for yourself if you want.

We’re already watching our legal standards get stress-tested by the day—open defiance of federal authority in the streets, and now from political leaders themselves. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey have actively encouraged resistance to federal law, from sanctuary-city policies to refusing cooperation with federal agents to openly undermining immigration enforcement. These are the very people who never stop lecturing the country about “democracy,” even as they take a sledgehammer to it.

From shielding illegal activity to obstructing federal officers, their record is one long campaign against the rule of law. And now we have lawmakers stepping forward to deny the existence of clear legislation—and in some cases appearing to participate in violating it.

That’s not activism. That’s institutional rot.

If this isn’t dealt with swiftly and decisively, the barn door is wide open for a stampede of mob rule. Once politicians decide laws only apply to their opponents, the system collapses fast. These miscreants—and Don Lemon right alongside them—must be held accountable, and not quietly, not delicately, but in a very public and unmistakable way.

Add as a preferred source on Google

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Should Illegal Immigrants be Deported?*
This poll subscribes you to our free newsletter. Unsubscribe any time.