Hard Wire

Elllison Comments On Protest

2.2k Views

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has never been shy about leveraging politics to blur the lines between law and activism, but his most recent media appearances — from CNN’s OutFront to Don Lemon’s YouTube channel — mark a low point in the already fraught intersection of law enforcement, protest culture, and political rhetoric. When pressed about the illegal storming of a St. Paul church by anti-ICE protesters during Sunday worship services, Ellison's response wasn't a defense of the law — it was a deflection wrapped in partisan grievances.

“I wasn’t there. I don’t know what happened. I can only tell you the president is causing all of this,” Ellison said, deflecting a direct question about whether federal laws were violated.

This wasn’t a misstep. It was a calculated dodge.


Let’s be clear: The law in question — the FACE Act — applies explicitly to places of religious worship. As Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, pointed out, it’s not just about protecting clinics. It prohibits threats, intimidation, or interference with people exercising their religious rights. It also covers property damage. And if that weren’t enough, the Ku Klux Klan Act — passed to prevent mobs from infringing on Americans' civil liberties — may also apply.

Yet Ellison claimed with a straight face that the FACE Act is solely about reproductive health, as if the statute’s plain language doesn’t include churches. His rationale? It doesn’t fit his narrative. “How they are stretching either of these laws to apply to people who protested in a church over the behavior of a religious leader is beyond me,” he told Lemon.


No stretch is required. Dozens of agitators barged into a church during a service and disrupted worship. The motive, they claim, was political — a protest against someone they believed to be affiliated with ICE. Whether or not their target, Pastor David Easterwood, is actually the same man as the ICE official they intended to shame remains unverified. But that’s beside the point. The protest wasn't just a demonstration — it was an intrusion into sacred space, and the law doesn't give mobs a pass because they feel righteous.

Don Lemon’s defense of his involvement — that he was merely covering the event — is similarly flimsy. Footage shows him embedded with the agitators as the disruption began, filming from inside the sanctuary. Dhillon was direct in her rebuttal: “A house of worship is not a public forum for your protest… Nor does the First Amendment protect your pseudo journalism of disrupting a prayer service.”

Lemon, predictably, responded by casting himself as the real victim, citing online threats and MAGA-fueled vitriol. He insisted he’s been unfairly framed as “the face of a protest” he was merely documenting, and pivoted to the death of Renee Nicole Good, the flashpoint behind the protests. But this too is misdirection. The public has every right to scrutinize media figures who embed themselves in illegal activity and present it as noble dissent.


Ellison’s broader claim — that all of this is somehow the fault of “Operation Metro Surge” or Donald Trump himself — is not just unserious; it’s dangerous. In essence, he’s arguing that provocative federal policies justify disruptive, potentially illegal protest in churches. That’s a stunning position for a state’s top law enforcement officer to take.

If the law means anything — and if public officials are serious about preserving civic norms — it must apply equally, regardless of political alignment. Storming a church to intimidate a pastor over a rumored federal connection isn't activism. It’s harassment. And justifying it under the First Amendment is not a defense. It's a desecration of the very principles Ellison claims to uphold.

Previous Protest Held At St. Paul Retail Store
Next Eric Holder Comments On Trump Policy