Independent broadcaster Don Lemon finds himself in hot water following the release of footage where he openly discusses “Operation Pull-Up.” This initiative led to a disruptive protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, during a Sunday service. The unrest has attracted the attention of federal authorities, who are investigating possible violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act.
In video shared widely online, which conservative commentator Benny Johnson referenced in a tweet, Lemon states, “It’s called Operation Pull-Up! After we do the operation, you’ll see it live! It’s a surprise, I can’t tell you where!” This footage is central to a Department of Justice probe and suggests Lemon’s involvement in orchestrating the disruption during worship.
The protest was directed at Pastor David Easterwood, who is also a senior official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). As activists rallied inside the church, they chanted slogans like “Justice for Renee Good” and “ICE out.” Many congregants left early, visibly shaken by the confrontational scene.
One parishioner described the protest as a violation of their sacred space, saying, “These people have come into our house and they’ve interrupted our worship… I feel violated, I feel interrupted, I feel angry.” This sentiment underscores the emotional toll the event took on churchgoers, illustrating a profound discomfort as their place of worship became a battleground for activist agendas.
The protest stems from the recent death of Renee Nicole Good, a Minneapolis woman killed earlier this year during an ICE operation led by agent Jonathan Ross. Activists assert that her death is being overlooked and object to Easterwood’s dual role as both a pastor and an ICE official, arguing that it contradicts Christian teachings.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison publicly backed the protesters, commending Lemon for his role in “lifting up this fight for truth and fairness.” This support sharply contrasts with the federal view. Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon criticized the event as “an outrageous desecration of a house of worship,” announcing ongoing investigations into potential violations of the FACE Act.
The FACE Act, established in 1994, criminalizes threats and interference with the right to religious worship. If evidence surfaces that Lemon and the protest participants violated this law, they could face severe penalties, including heavy fines or imprisonment. The Ku Klux Klan Act could also apply if organized intimidation or conspiracy is determined.
Attorney General Pam Bondi added that attacks against law enforcement and intimidation of Christians would be met with “the full force of federal law.” She emphasized that the recorded statements, especially those from Lemon, might serve as critical evidence of premeditation. According to legal expert Elie Honig, Lemon’s comments suggest deliberate intent to disrupt worship. He stated, “The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but not in private religious settings.”
The protest witnessed Lemon livestreaming events inside and outside the church as participants expressed their views. Clips shared on social media have helped reconstruct the timeline of the protest, while law enforcement reportedly stood by without immediate intervention. Multiple investigations are now exploring the incident’s implications.
The aftermath has been significant for Cities Church. Pastor David Easterwood has remained largely quiet since the protest, expressing his frustration with the lack of civil dialogue. “No one is willing to talk,” he said. “I have to take care of my church and my family.” This reaction points to the broader challenges congregations face when intersecting with activist movements.
National debate surrounding the clash of protest rights and religious freedom has intensified. Federal authorities have positioned the event within a broader narrative of hostility towards conservative churches. President Trump referred to the protesters as “agitators and insurrectionists,” calling for strong prosecution.
On the other hand, advocates for accountability in the Good case argue that the protest was justified given the circumstances of her death. While ICE stands by the actions of their agents, the Department of Justice has yet to launch a direct investigation into the shooting, which continues to stir controversy in Minnesota.
Activist Nekima Levy Armstrong, who participated in the protest, stated during her livestream, “This will not stand. They cannot pretend to be a house of God, while harboring someone who is commanding ICE agents to terrorize our communities.” Her words reflect the passionate convictions driving this activism and underscore the tensions between community concerns and law enforcement.
The divide among state and federal officials deepens, with Minnesota’s Democratic leaders expressing sympathy for the protesters, while the DOJ pursues its legal review. The FACE Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act give federal authorities expansive power to file charges in such cases, indicating potential shifts in the enforcement of these regulations concerning religious spaces.
Legal analysts view the evidence as strikingly clear. Honig noted that “You have streaming video, you have Don Lemon on camera describing what is about to happen, and you have eyewitness testimony from domestic worshippers.” The straightforward nature of the evidence presents challenges for the involved parties.
As the investigation unfolds, public scrutiny highlights stark divisions in American perspectives on activism, immigration enforcement, and the sanctity of religious spaces. For Cities Church and its congregation, the events of that day have left lasting implications. One parishioner poignantly captured the aftermath: “We came here to pray. Now we’re part of a political storm.”
"*" indicates required fields
