Anti-ICE Protesters Who Disrupted Minnesota Church Service Will Not Face State Charges

While state prosecutors declined charges, a federal criminal case continues against 39 defendants, including former CNN anchor Don Lemon.

Cities Church in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 19, 2026. Angelina Katsanis/AP Photo, File

Prosecutors said Wednesday that dozens of anti-immigration enforcement protesters who interrupted a Minnesota church service earlier this year will not face state criminal charges.

The decision, announced on June 3 by St. Paul City Attorney Irene Kao, comes as federal prosecutors continue pursuing criminal civil rights charges against 39 people, including former CNN anchor and independent journalist Don Lemon, over the Jan. 18 protest at Cities Church in St. Paul.

Kao said her office conducted a careful review of video footage and other available evidence before determining that criminal prosecution under Minnesota statutes was not warranted.

“Current evidence is insufficient to meet that standard for criminal charges under Minnesota state statutes,” Kao said, adding that the decision not to prosecute “should not be interpreted as an endorsement of unlawful behavior or public disorder.”

The decision was met with criticism by one of the church pastors, who was also a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official overseeing an immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota around the time of the protest.

“According to the St. Paul City Attorney’s logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, a cathedral, or a temple, intimidate the families and children inside, and shut down their religious gathering. Just call it a ‘protest,’” Cities Church lead pastor Jonathan Parnell said in a statement.

Kao said city prosecutors see violence, property destruction, and threats to public safety as serious, but that investigators found none of those elements occurred during the demonstration.

“The right to peacefully protest is protected, as is the right to exercise one’s religious beliefs,“ she said. ”Balancing these equally important rights is paramount to our decision today.”

The protest drew national attention after demonstrators entered the church during a worship service on Jan. 18 while chanting slogans including “ICE out” and “Justice for Renee Good,” according to video footage livestreamed online. Good was fatally shot by a federal agent during an anti-ICE protest in Minnesota after driving her SUV toward the officer. The Trump administration defended the officer’s actions as self-defense while progressive groups and Democratic officials criticized the shooting as unjustified.

The incident, which then-Attorney General Pam Bondi described as a “coordinated attack,” led to a number of arrests and federal charges, including for allegedly conspiring to violate someone’s constitutional rights, a crime that carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.

At the time, Cities Church described the protest as an act of intimidation and a violation of freedom of worship.

“They accosted members of our congregation, frightened children, and created a scene marked by intimidation and threat,” the church wrote in a statement. “Church buildings are meant to be places of peace and solace.”

Charges Moving Forward at Federal Level

Federal prosecutors have alleged that the demonstrators intentionally targeted the church and disrupted a religious service in violation of worshippers’ constitutional rights.

A grand jury indicted 39 individuals, including Lemon and another independent journalist, on charges of conspiracy and interference with the First Amendment rights of congregants.

Charging documents allege that the protesters took part in a “coordinated takeover-style attack and engaged in acts of oppression, intimidation, threats, interference, and physical obstruction,” leading some worshippers to flee out of fear for their safety.

The defendants have entered not guilty pleas. The case remains in the discovery stage, with the parties sparring over evidence and grand jury materials, with no trial date scheduled.

In a recent filing, Lemon’s attorneys called the case “replete with red flags,” alleging “irregularities” in the grand jury process, and noting that multiple judges found that the government’s search warrant and complaint affidavits lacked probable cause.

Previously, Lemon’s attorney described his client’s arrest as an “unprecedented” attack on free speech, while Lemon told a press conference after his arrest that he looks forward to litigating the case in court and that he “will not be silenced.”

Arjun Singh and The Associated Press contributed to this report.