Former CNN anchor Don Lemon was taken into federal custody in Los Angeles on Thursday night in connection with a January 18 protest that disrupted a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota. Federal authorities say the arrest ties back to demonstrators who targeted a pastor reportedly affiliated with ICE, though the specifics of the charges were not immediately clear. The news of Lemon’s arrest shocked many Americans who remember him as a flagship liberal voice on cable television and now see the Justice Department moving aggressively.
Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, confirmed the arrest and blasted the Justice Department, saying Lemon was doing constitutionally protected journalism while covering the event and was in Los Angeles for the Grammy Awards when federal agents took him into custody. Media reports say federal agents executed the arrest in L.A. overnight, an extraordinary step against a journalist who has been critical of the current administration. The optics of federal agents arresting a high-profile media figure in Hollywood are bound to set off firestorms about selective enforcement and political targeting.
This is not the first time the government has tried to bring Lemon into this legal fight; earlier a federal magistrate judge declined to sign off on proposed charges when prosecutors first sought them, saying there was insufficient probable cause at that stage. The Justice Department, however, has pressed forward and secured an indictment, underscoring how the current DOJ is willing to push past judicial skepticism when it chooses to. Conservatives should be wary anytime a precedent is created that allows sprawling federal prosecutions to overrule cautious judges.
Authorities allege that the January demonstration — which protesters say was aimed at calling out immigration enforcement policies — crossed a line by invading a place of worship and disrupting services, and prosecutors point to video evidence they say shows coordination and planning. Some reports indicate the government is exploring serious statutes in its charges, arguing the actions went beyond mere reporting or bystander footage. If proven, coordinating a disruptive operation inside a church is unacceptable; the right to protest does not include trampling the rights of worshippers.
Yet we must call out the glaring double standard here: many on the left cheered street-level chaos for years, but now that one of their own faces federal scrutiny, we are told to clutch our pearls about threats to press freedom. Lemon’s attorney framed the arrest as an attack on the First Amendment, but conservatives have long argued that journalism does not give anyone a license to plan or participate in actions that violate the law. The simplest, most conservative demand is equal treatment under the law — no hero worship for street agitators and no special protection for those who cross legal lines while claiming to be reporters.
Reaction across the media landscape was immediate and polarized: liberal outlets and press freedom advocates decried the arrests as chilling, while many conservatives and law-and-order voices emphasized the need to protect churches and public safety from coordinated disruptions. Lemon’s team has vowed to fight the charges vigorously, and a court appearance is expected to follow in short order as this fast-moving case heads through the federal system. Americans should watch closely to see whether the Justice Department pursues this matter on principled grounds or as a political tool.
This episode is a warning shot about the dangerous road of selective prosecution and weaponized justice. Protecting places of worship, enforcing the law, and defending constitutional protest are not mutually exclusive, but our leaders must apply the law evenly and transparently. Conservatives should demand accountability from the DOJ and insist that no one — whether a celebrity journalist or an activist leader — is above the law or immune from scrutiny when evidence suggests wrongdoing.
