Former CNN anchor Don Lemon has enlisted the help of former federal prosecutor Joseph H. Thompson to defend against charges related to his involvement in an anti-ICE protest at a St. Paul church. This move comes as Lemon faces serious legal challenges, including conspiracy and violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which could set a precedent for how such laws are applied in cases involving religious freedom.
The incident in question occurred on January 18, 2026, when protesters disrupted a service at Cities Church in St. Paul to demonstrate against Pastor David Easterwood, who also serves as an acting field office director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Lemon, along with independent journalist Georgia Fort, was livestreaming the event when tensions escalated, leading to confrontations with congregants. Federal authorities later charged Lemon with participating in what they described as a “takeover-style attack” aimed at intimidating worshipers and interfering with their religious practices.
Joseph H. Thompson, the newly hired attorney, brings a unique perspective to the case, having recently resigned from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Minnesota in mid-January. His departure was part of a wave of resignations by federal prosecutors who protested the Trump administration’s handling of the investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent. Thompson and at least five other lawyers left their positions after allegedly being pressured to focus the probe on Good’s widow and other anti-ICE activists rather than on the actions of the federal agent involved.
The Renee Good shooting has been a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over ICE’s enforcement tactics, particularly in communities with large immigrant populations. Good, a Minneapolis mother, was killed during an encounter with ICE agents, sparking widespread protests and calls for accountability. Thompson’s resignation highlighted internal conflicts within the Justice Department over the direction of the investigation, with some prosecutors arguing that political considerations were undermining the pursuit of justice.
Lemon’s legal team, led by prominent Washington D.C. attorney Abbe Lowell, now includes Thompson, who served as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney and acting U.S. Attorney in Minnesota. During his 17-year tenure, Thompson handled high-profile cases, including the Feeding Our Future fraud scandal, which involved billions of dollars in state funds. His expertise in federal prosecution will be crucial as Lemon prepares to battle charges that carry significant penalties, including potential prison time.
The use of the FACE Act in this context is particularly noteworthy, as the law has rarely been applied to cases involving religious freedom. Enacted in 1994, the FACE Act primarily addresses interference with reproductive health clinics, but it also protects places of worship. If prosecuted successfully, this case could expand the application of the act, influencing how future protests at religious institutions are handled by federal authorities.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the case is being closely watched by media freedom advocates and legal experts. Lemon’s defense may argue that his actions were protected under the First Amendment as journalistic coverage of a public protest. However, prosecutors contend that his participation crossed the line into criminal activity. The outcome could have implications for the boundaries between journalism and activism, especially in politically charged environments.
Looking ahead, court hearings are scheduled, and both sides are preparing for a potentially lengthy trial. The collaboration between Lemon’s team and Thompson, who once oversaw the office now prosecuting the case, adds a layer of complexity to the proceedings. Regardless of the verdict, this case is likely to resonate in discussions about immigration enforcement, press freedoms, and the intersection of law and politics in the United States.
