Appeals Court Deals Blow to Justice Department Over Minnesota Church Protest Charges
A United States appeals court has firmly rejected a push by the federal Justice Department to charge five additional individuals in connection with a disruptive protest at a Minnesota church service on 18 January. This decision, revealed in court documents made public on Saturday, represents a significant legal setback for the Trump administration as it continues to pursue demonstrators involved in the incident.
Unprecedented Legal Request Dismissed by Judges
The ruling from the eighth US circuit court of appeals underscores the extraordinary lengths to which the Trump administration has gone in its prosecution efforts. One judge involved in the case remarked that the Justice Department's request appeared to be entirely unprecedented in legal proceedings. This follows an earlier decision by a federal magistrate judge who declined to approve arrest warrants for the five proposed defendants, citing a distinct lack of compelling evidence.
Among those the Justice Department sought to charge was former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who recorded the demonstration while covering it in his professional capacity as a journalist. The magistrate judge had previously approved charges for three alleged leaders of the protest but struck down a proposed charge accusing them of physically obstructing a house of worship.
Don Lemon's Defiant Response to Ongoing Pursuit
In an interview published on Saturday with his former CNN colleague Alisyn Camerota, now a Scripps News anchor and contributor, Lemon expressed his readiness for the Trump administration to continue its pursuit. "I'm not naive," Lemon stated, "They just don't give up because they – you know – they want to save face."
Lemon further elaborated on his expectations, suggesting that the administration might attempt to circumvent legal norms. "If there's no law to fit, they will try to fit or retrofit something or go around a judge and just do it themselves," he asserted, highlighting the contentious nature of the case.
Background of the Protest and Charges
The demonstration in question involved protesters interrupting a church service to object to a pastor's apparent connections with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This incident has attracted considerable attention, occurring against the backdrop of the Trump administration's sweeping immigration crackdown in Minnesota and its public vows to protect Christian services.
The three defendants already charged – activists Nekima Levy Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen, and William Kelly – face accusations of conspiracy against rights for allegedly intimidating and harassing parishioners, according to a criminal complaint. They have countered by accusing the Trump administration of engaging in retaliation over their protest activities.
Judicial Criticism and Department's Next Steps
Chief US District Court Judge Patrick Schiltz, in a letter made public on Saturday, described the Justice Department's request as "unheard of" within his jurisdiction and any other federal court in the eighth circuit, which encompasses seven US states. All three judges on the appeals court panel unanimously agreed not to intervene, although one judge, Leonard Steven Grasz, noted he believed prosecutors had shown sufficient evidence to justify charges against the other proposed defendants.
Judge Grasz pointed out, however, that prosecutors have alternative legal avenues to pursue these charges, rather than relying on the appeals court. The Justice Department retains the option to seek charges through a grand jury or to present additional evidence to the magistrate judge. A spokesperson for the Justice Department has not provided an immediate response to requests for comment on the ruling.
