Legal Troubles for Former CNN Host

Experts shared insights on Friday indicating that for the Justice Department to successfully convict the former CNN host who allegedly disrupted a Sunday service alongside anti-ICE protesters, they must establish that Don Lemon was actively involved, rather than merely being “just present” during the incident at a Minnesota church.

Lemon could face a decade in prison for one count of conspiracy to infringe upon another person’s constitutional rights and for violating the FACE Act of 1994. This law was initially implemented to prevent the obstruction of clinic access but also restricts interference with religious services.

He maintains that he was merely documenting the January 18 confrontation in St. Paul as a journalist for his online show, The Don Lemon Show. Prosecutors will likely challenge this defense as the case unfolds in Los Angeles federal court.

Ron Kuby, a well-known criminal defense lawyer in New York City, commented, “To establish conspiracy, it’s essential to demonstrate that all involved shared an unlawful goal.” Lemon’s defense centers around the claim of simply recording events as they occurred.

“To establish collusion or a substantive violation of the FACE Act, there must be evidence of something beyond merely being present at the scene,” Kuby explained.

A grand jury has indicted Lemon, along with eight others, for conspiring to invade Cities Church and disrupt Sunday services following the shooting of Renee Good by ICE agents. The court documents outline 26 “overt acts” that prosecutors argue demonstrate Lemon participated as a protester rather than as a journalist.

The 59-year-old, now unemployed, was arrested late Thursday in Los Angeles shortly after mingling with celebrities at a local music event.

Lemon was dismissed from CNN in 2023, and his show was canceled, yet he has continued to record protests and share them on social media.

Kuby and another defense attorney, Michael Buckner, noted that simply being present at a crime scene does not implicate a journalist as an accessory to the crime.

“You can’t charge a journalist with robbing a bank,” Buckner pointed out.

He added that federal authorities must show that Lemon conspired with others to “deprive churchgoers of their constitutional right to attend church.”

“Lemon would have had to agree to actively interfere with parishioners’ ability to worship,” Buckner noted. “If he was just interviewing attendees and not trying to disrupt, then there’s no case.”

Prosecutors allege Lemon was involved in a “hijack-type attack” at the church and even acknowledged Black Lives Matter activist and civil rights lawyer Nekima Armstrong for her contributions that day.

The indictment claims that he took measures to protect the operation’s confidentiality by instructing certain co-conspirators to keep the goals under wraps and temporarily stepping away to avoid inadvertently disclosing aspects of the planning.

The Justice Department previously faced hurdles obtaining an arrest warrant for Lemon, as a federal judge blocked the effort, and an appeals court chose not to review the ruling.

Kuby believes that establishing a solid case against Lemon will prove quite challenging for prosecutors.

His arrest occurred just before a Grammy Awards event, and three others were also taken into custody, implicated in what Attorney General Pam Bondi described as a “coordinated attack.”

Lemon’s attorney, Abby Lowell, asserted that her client engages in “constitutionally protected work” in St. Paul.

“The First Amendment is designed to safeguard journalists in their mission to expose the truth and hold power accountable,” Lowell stated, adding that she also represents Hunter Biden, who has faced his own controversies.