Two More Arrested in St. Paul Church Protest Case, Bringing Total to Nine
Federal investigators have apprehended two more individuals believed to be connected to the January protest that disrupted a service at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, bringing the total number of people charged to nine. The latest developments add another layer to a case that has sparked a national conversation about protest boundaries, religious freedom, and press rights.
The U.S. Department of Justice identified the newly arrested suspects as Ian Davis Austin and Jerome Deangelo Richardson. They are expected to face charges similar to those already filed against others in the case: conspiracy to violate constitutional rights and alleged violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. The 1994 law, originally designed to protect abortion clinic access, also prohibits using force, threat, or obstruction to interfere with religious worship.
The incident occurred on January 18 when a group of protesters entered the church during a service, chanting "ICE out." The church's pastor is a known official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), making it a target for activists opposing federal immigration policies.
"If you riot in a place of worship, we WILL find you," Attorney General Pam Bondi stated in a social media post following the arrests, underscoring the department's hardline stance.
Journalists' Arrests Fuel First Amendment Concerns
This latest law enforcement action follows the controversial arrests last Friday of former CNN anchor Don Lemon and independent journalist Georgia Fort. Both were charged with FACE Act violations for their presence at the same protest, though they maintain they were there in a reporting capacity. A federal magistrate had previously rejected an initial attempt to charge Lemon, calling the government's early case "frivolous."
Their arrests have drawn sharp criticism from free speech advocates and local officials. St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her called the move "deeply chilling," warning that it represents an erosion of First Amendment protections. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has also expressed concern over the implications for press freedom.
Legal Ramifications and Broader Context
Convictions under the FACE Act can carry penalties ranging from fines to up to a year in prison for basic violations, with higher penalties for more severe infractions. The case unfolds against a contentious national backdrop where protests at places of worship—often tied to hot-button political issues—have become increasingly common, testing the limits of lawful demonstration.
The Justice Department's aggressive application of the FACE Act in this context is being closely watched by legal experts. Some see it as a necessary defense of religious spaces, while others fear it could be used to criminalize disruptive but non-violent political protest or intimidate journalists covering such events.
Voices from the Community
Marcus Chen, a local parishioner at a different St. Paul church: "A house of worship should be a sanctuary. While I understand the passion behind the immigration debate, disrupting a service frightens people and crosses a line. The law should protect that."
Dr. Anya Sharma, political science professor at the University of Minnesota: "This is a complex intersection of several fundamental rights. The use of the FACE Act here is legally novel and will likely be challenged on constitutional grounds, particularly regarding the journalists. It's a precedent-setting case."
Riley O'Connor, activist with the "Abolish ICE" coalition: "This is a blatant intimidation tactic! They're arresting journalists to scare the rest of us into silence. The real crime is ICE's actions, not a few minutes of disruption. The government is protecting a system of cruelty and punishing those who expose it."
Pastor Michael Griggs, leading a church in Minneapolis: "My heart aches for all involved. We must hold two truths: sacred spaces deserve respect, and the right to protest injustice is vital. The legal response feels disproportionate, especially for the reporters. We need dialogue, not just escalation."