Minnesota Anti-ICE Protesters Avoid State Charges After Church Incident

Dozens of anti-ICE protesters, including former CNN journalist Don Lemon, will not face state criminal charges after disrupting a church service in Minnesota in January. Church leaders criticized this decision, arguing it gives activists freedom to interrupt religious gatherings without consequences.

St. Paul City Attorney Irene Kao announced Wednesday that her office decided not to pursue charges. She stated that the evidence does not support prosecution under Minnesota law. “Following a careful evaluation of the video footage, investigative reports, and other available materials, prosecutors determined that the current evidence is insufficient to meet that standard for criminal charges under Minnesota state statutes,” her statement explained.

While state charges are off the table, federal prosecutors have charged 39 individuals, including Lemon and another journalist, with civil rights violations related to the disruption. These federal cases are still pending.

“Following a careful evaluation of the video footage, investigative reports, and other available materials, prosecutors determined that the current evidence is insufficient to meet that standard for criminal charges under Minnesota state statutes,” the statement said.

Activists had shut down a service at Cities Church in St. Paul on January 19, 2026, alleging the pastor was involved with immigration enforcement as an ICE agent. This protest resulted in service disruption, with demonstrators shouting “Justice for Renee Good,” a woman killed by federal agents.

The decision not to charge protesters drew strong condemnation from Jonathan Parnell, lead pastor at Cities Church. He suggested that such logic could justify similar disruptions in other religious settings. “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 shut down their religious gathering. Just call it a ‘protest,’” Parnell remarked.

Kao emphasized that not filing state charges does not support unlawful behavior. She stressed the importance of balancing the right to protest with the right to practice religion. According to her, the protest involved no violence, property damage, or threats to public safety. However, the church’s attorneys argued that the absence of such damage does not mean laws were not broken.

Attorneys representing the church maintained that the lack of broken windows or vandalism does not imply laws were upheld.