- “The First Amendment exists to protect journalists whose role it is to shine light on the truth and hold those in power accountable.” – Abbe Lowell, Don Lemon’s attorney
Los Angeles – Don Lemon, a longtime journalist and former CNN anchor, was arrested late on Jan. 29 by federal agents in Los Angeles, an escalation in what press freedom advocates and multiple courts have described as an unprecedented effort by the Trump administration to criminalize routine newsgathering.
Lemon was taken into custody after 11 p.m. in the lobby of a Beverly Hills hotel, where he was staying while covering the Grammy Awards.
According to CNN, the arrest involved more than two dozen agents from Homeland Security Investigations and the FBI. Federal prosecutors say Lemon faces two charges: conspiring to violate constitutional rights and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act, a law typically used in cases involving abortion clinics or religious intimidation.
The arrest stems from Lemon’s presence at a Jan. 18 protest inside Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, where demonstrators opposed to Immigration and Customs Enforcement entered the church during a service.
Lemon and Georgia Fort, another journalist, were live-streaming the event as it unfolded. Both have repeatedly stated that they were present solely as members of the press documenting a newsworthy public protest.
The Justice Department’s pursuit of charges against Lemon comes despite repeated judicial rejections of its legal theory.
According to court records, federal prosecutors initially sought criminal complaints against Lemon and others, but U.S. Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko refused to sign the complaints, finding the evidence insufficient.
Prosecutors then appealed to the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, Patrick J. Schiltz, who also rejected the request.
Undeterred, the government filed an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, seeking to compel the lower court to issue arrest warrants. On Jan. 23, a three-judge panel denied the petition, concluding that the government had not shown it lacked other adequate means of relief.
Despite those setbacks, Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly announced arrests tied to what she described as a “coordinated attack” on the church, naming Lemon and Fort among those taken into custody. Bondi and other administration officials have argued that journalists at the scene interfered with the religious rights of churchgoers.
Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, rejected that characterization and framed the arrest as a direct assault on constitutional protections.
“Don has been a journalist for 30 years, and his constitutionally protected work in Minneapolis was no different than what he has always done,” Lowell said in a statement. “The First Amendment exists to protect journalists whose role it is to shine light on the truth and hold those in power accountable.”
Lowell accused the Justice Department of misplacing its priorities.
“Instead of investigating the federal agents who killed two peaceful Minnesota protesters, the Trump Justice Department is devoting its time, attention and resources to this arrest, and that is the real indictment of wrongdoing in this case,” he said. “This unprecedented attack on the First Amendment and transparent attempt to distract attention from the many crises facing this administration will not stand. Don will fight these charges vigorously and thoroughly in court.”
Video evidence and contemporaneous statements by Lemon appear to reinforce his claim that he was acting as a journalist.
In footage Lemon later posted to YouTube, he can be heard telling protesters, “I’m just here photographing, I’m not part of the group… I’m a journalist.”
Fort made similar remarks when federal agents arrived at her home early in the morning following the protest.
Speaking on a Facebook Live stream, she said, “This is all stemming from the fact that I filmed a protest as a member of the media.” She added, “We are supposed to have our constitutional right of the freedom to film, to be a member of the press. I don’t feel like I have my First Amendment right as a member of the press because now federal agents are at my door arresting me for filming the church protest a few weeks ago.”
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said the arrests raise serious civil liberties concerns.
“In Minnesota, we do not treat journalists like criminals for doing their jobs,” Ellison said in a statement. “No one should be arrested merely for holding a camera, asking hard questions, or telling the public what we have a right to know.”
Press freedom organizations across the ideological spectrum echoed that view, warning that the Lemon case represents a broader effort by the Trump administration to test the boundaries of government power over the press.
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said the arrests were intended to send a message. “These arrests under bogus legal theories for obviously constitutionally protected reporting are clear warning shots aimed at other journalists,” Stern said. “The unmistakable message is that journalists must tread cautiously because the government is looking for any way to target them.”
Stern said the appropriate response is resistance rather than retreat. “The answer to this outrageous attack is not fear or self-censorship,” he said. “It’s an even stronger commitment to journalism, the truth, and the First Amendment. If the Trump administration thinks it can bully journalists into submission, it is wrong.”
CNN, Lemon’s former employer, also issued a statement criticizing the arrest and emphasizing the judiciary’s repeated rejection of the Justice Department’s claims.
“The FBI’s arrest of our former CNN colleague Don Lemon raises profoundly concerning questions about press freedom and the First Amendment,” the network said. “The Department of Justice already failed twice to get an arrest warrant for Don and several other journalists in Minnesota, where a chief judge of the Minnesota Federal District Court found there was ‘no evidence’ that there was any criminal behavior involved in their work.”
Legal scholars note that criminal prosecutions of journalists are rare and historically fraught, often triggering prolonged constitutional battles over the scope of First Amendment protections. While administrations of both parties have investigated reporters in leak cases, the Lemon arrest stands out because it centers on journalists documenting a public protest in real time.
Lemon is expected to appear in federal court in Los Angeles. His case now joins a growing list of conflicts between the Trump administration and independent media, as courts, press organizations and civil liberties advocates grapple with what they say is a dangerous expansion of federal authority into the realm of constitutionally protected journalism.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
I have to wonder if those on the left criticizing this would be saying the same if a Fox journalist tagged along with a bunch of conservatives and disrupted a black church, a synagogue or a mosque?
Also, did Trump arrest Lemon? Why the title?
KO say, “Also, did Trump arrest Lemon?”
Yeah good point, unless there is evidence Trump knew or approved or ordered it.
“Federal prosecutors say Lemon faces two charges: conspiring to violate constitutional rights and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act, a law typically used in cases involving abortion clinics or religious intimidation.”
If you were silent when grandmas were arrested under the FACE Act for praying outside abortion clinics, spare me your grief over Don Lemon’s arrest.
Keith, this is a deflection—pure and simple. Each enforcement action stands or falls on its own facts, not on whether you can dredge up a different controversy from another political universe and yell “hypocrisy.”
You are collapsing activists and journalists into the same category, as if that distinction doesn’t matter. Activism and journalism raise very different constitutional concerns. Pretending otherwise is a way to avoid grappling with the press-freedom implications here.
You’re not defending the arrest or the charges on their merits. Instead you’re attempting to deflect.
“In footage Lemon later posted to YouTube, he can be heard telling protesters, “I’m just here photographing, I’m not part of the group… I’m a journalist.”
From ChatGPT:
Based on reports from January 2026, independent journalist Don Lemon was documented providing coffee and donuts to demonstrators during an anti-ICE protest at a church in St. Paul, Minnesota. Lemon, who was livestreaming the event, was later arrested on federal charges related to the disruption of the church service.
Action: Lemon was filmed handing out coffee and donuts to protesters before they entered the church.
Context: The incident occurred in January 2026, where protesters were targeting a church due to the pastor’s alleged ties to immigration enforcement.
So now you’ve changed your tactics, but you’re still not engaging the legal or constitutional question of whether federal prosecutors should be charging a journalist under a statute designed for coercive obstruction. Rather you’re trying to argue that Lemon was not acting as a journalist and therefore fair game for politically based prosecutions (ignoring the multiple judges who refused to sign off on an arrest warrant including a Scalia disciple). You’re trying to win by rhetorical contamination – if you can smear journalism as activism, then press protections conveniently disappear, which is what the administration wants, and apparently so do you.
So Lemon wasn’t part of the protest but he just happened to be there supplying coffee and donuts to the protesters before they entered and disrupted the church service? Nothing to see there…
Journalists are allowed to be present, speak to people, and document events without becoming participants.
There is no mainstream reporting that says Lemon was “supplying donuts or coffee.” That claim does not appear in ABC News, AP, CBS, The Washington Post, Reuters, or People.
It originates in partisan commentary and social media embellishment, not in the indictment, not in court filings, and not in verified reporting.
I also looked at the indictment and the indictment does not say anything about donuts, coffee, or Lemon “supplying” protesters.
It would be helpful to this point is we had a declaration of probable cause which was made public, but from what I can tell, it hasn’t.
And hand out coffee and donuts prior to them committing a crime.
Also Keith, you cut and paste from ChatGPT, but did not cite where it pulled that information from – something that it provides.
Specific allegation about the coffee:
Does not appear in ABC News
Does not appear in AP, Reuters, WaPo, CBS, NYT, etc…
Does not appear in reporting on the indictment
Does not appear in any quoted court document
So give me a link to where you saw this information
Posting from ChatGPT wastes everyone’s time. All output has to be evaluated for accuracy.
ChatGPT has a 15% hallucination rate. That means 1 in 7 responses might contain made-up information.
https://mpgone.com/is-chatgpt-accurate-the-truth-in-a-2025-expert-review/
Accuracy of ChatGPT varies across different fields. Lowest accuracy is with current events. Users expect accuracy to be comparable between subjects, but it is not.
“ChatGPT’s accuracy isn’t staying the same. It’s actually getting worse in some areas.
….
Stanford researchers recently discovered something alarming. They tested ChatGPT on the same tasks over several months. The results? Performance dropped significantly in certain areas.
….
ChatGPT knows a little about everything, but it’s not an expert in anything specific. This creates real problems for specialized tasks.
….
Domain, Accuracy Rate, Common Issues:
Medical Information, 45-60%, Outdated treatment guidelines, missing recent research.
Legal Advice, 40-55%, Jurisdiction-specific errors, outdated laws.
Technical Programming, 65-75%, Framework version conflicts, deprecated methods.
Scientific Research, 50-70%, Citation errors, methodology flaws.”
Here’s Google’s A.I. mode:
In January 2026, a video of independent journalist Don Lemon handing out coffee and donuts to protesters in Minnesota went viral on Instagram and other platforms.
The footage captures Lemon interacting with demonstrators at the Federal Whipple immigration building in Minneapolis before they moved to Cities Church in St. Paul. Key details regarding the video and its aftermath include:
The Protest: Activists from groups like Black Lives Matter Minnesota were protesting the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent. They targeted the church because they believed one of its pastors was a regional director for ICE.
Don Lemon’s Role: Lemon livestreamed the events, documenting the demonstrators as they gathered and later entered the church during a Sunday service. While Lemon stated he was acting as a journalist, critics and federal authorities highlighted his active engagement, such as providing food and referring to the group as “we” in his coverage.
Legal Consequences: On January 30, 2026, Lemon was arrested by federal authorities and charged with conspiracy against the rights of religious freedom and interfering with the exercise of religious freedom at a place of worship.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTq6qnvkS64/
What is the underlying link for your Google AI print out or is it the instagram link you have?
Here’s what the link you provided shows…
The reel shows a short viral video clip with an overlay claim that Don Lemon was “handing out donuts and coffee” at a protest. But what evidence is there that that in fact occurred? The link includes text on the video and sometimes background audio, but it does not provide any sourced evidence, court papers, or news articles to back up the claim.
There is no link to an official report, indictment, affidavit, or transcript shown in the reel.
So again, where is the information coming from? Because right now you’re claiming something that’s not even claimed by the prosecutors.
The word “Instagram” was the link in this sentence, but your format would’ve show it as a link so I provided it:
“In January 2026, a video of independent journalist Don Lemon handing out coffee and donuts to protesters in Minnesota went viral on **Instagram** and other platforms.”
Ok, I was checking. That video doesn’t show anything other than some dude making claims. If that’s the basis for the claim, it’s weak and won’t hold up in court.
Alright, I provided a video that supposedly shows it, it looks real to me, but I don’t think anything is going to satisfy you at this point so I’m not going to waste my time.
And pointing out that lefty news agencies AP, Reuters, WaPo, CBS, NYT didn’t report it is not surprising. Like I often say, fake news is not always what is reported on but also what news agencies refuse to report due to their biases.
Passing out doughnuts and coffee is aiding and abetting? I’ve heard of the Twinkee Defense and now we have the doughnut prosecution.
RM, reminds me a lot of the underlying theme of the last season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” !
I mean, RG
C’mon, DG . . . you ask us to momentarily pretend that Don Lemon is best understood as a persecuted journalist rather than a cable news personality whose most memorable contributions include confidently asserting on air that Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 might have been swallowed by a black hole, suggesting that women past a certain age are “past their prime,” (pissing-off his co-hosts), amplifying Jussie Smollett’s story as credible long after obvious holes appeared, and routinely blurring commentary with advocacy, all the while insisting he’s a news reporter. And now this is culminated with your headline, “Trump Escalates Crackdown on Newsgathering with Arrest of Don Lemon,” like we just lost Walter Cronkite to Hamas. Framing Lemon’s detention as an attack on “newsgathering” is like calling the detention of a food critic an assault on agriculture.
It’s not that Donald Trump doesn’t have a long, ugly record of hostility toward the press; Lord knows he does, and it’s often stupid and infantile. It’s that elevating Lemon as the martyr-in-chief as a ‘journalist’ requires ignoring years of high profile lapses that already stretched the term “journalistic integrity” past recognition. The headline doesn’t just exaggerate Trump’s actions, itt launders Lemon’s résumé and hopes readers won’t remember that credibility is something you build, and lose, long before anyone shows up with handcuffs. The left had the wrong ‘journalist’ arrested if they wanted to weaponize the arrest against Trump. In fact, who could have been a worse pick? I’m sure there were newsrooms screaming, “why did it have to be Don Lemmon? How do we spin this???”
I think if you are famous and the gendarmes come for you for some B.S, that no court is going to do anything about its good for your career. Lemon could use the publicity. Look what it did for Jimmy Kimmel.
“Lemon could use the publicity. Look what it did for Jimmy Kimmel.”
Yeah, for like 2 days.
“After a brief ratings spike upon his return from suspension in September 2025, Jimmy Kimmel Live! experienced a significant decline, losing over 50% to 64% of his audience shortly after. The show saw a 73% drop in the key 25-54 demographic, with viewers falling from 1.7 million on his return to 465,000 two days later.”
“However, despite the drop, the show’s ratings are still significantly higher compared to what they were averaging in the second quarter of 2025. According to The Independent, Jimmy Kimmel Live! was averaging approximately 1.77 million total viewers in Quarter 2.”
An actually sourced reference. A.I. is not a reputable source.