The Department of Justice, through Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, has publicly declared it will continue to pursue criminal charges related to the disruption at Cities Church in St. Paul — and singled out Don Lemon as a subject of that scrutiny. Dhillon told interviewers the department sees potential violations of statutes used in past protest prosecutions and pointed to social-media admissions she says undercut a journalistic defense.
But a federal magistrate judge recently declined to sign off on the particular complaint seeking charges against Lemon, a development that raises real questions about the strength of the DOJ’s initial presentation. That procedural rebuke does not end the matter; prosecutors can still pursue a grand jury or rework their filings, and the dispute now reads as much like a legal skirmish as a substantive win for press immunity.
Reports show federal agents did arrest several participants in the church disruption, and the docket briefly listed Lemon before his name disappeared from public filings, suggesting the case is being handled with both publicity and caution. The DOJ’s posture — loudly promising prosecutions while being rebuffed by a judge — smells of politics as much as it does law. Conservatives should be vigilant about politicized enforcement, but they should also insist that violations of worship and private safety be taken seriously, no matter who’s involved.
Lemon’s defenders insist his presence was journalistic, while prosecutors say his livestreaming and comments show foreknowledge and complicity — a factual fight that will determine whether this is protected reporting or coordinated disruption. Media elites cannot claim an automatic shield when footage and statements suggest active planning; if journalism becomes a license to terrorize congregations, we will see a dangerous and destructive precedent.
The posture the DOJ has taken — invoking long-arm civil rights statutes and promising “zero tolerance” for attacks on houses of worship — is appropriate if applied uniformly, but troubling if wielded selectively as a tool of political theater. The public deserves a clean, transparent prosecution if the facts support it, and conservatives rightly should demand both accountability for those who violated sacred space and resistance to any appearance that justice is being weaponized for partisan ends.
