DOJ’s SHOCKING Move: Don Lemon in Hot Water

Department of Justice seal on American flag background.

A new investigation threatens First Amendment liberties, raising alarms among conservatives.

Story Snapshot

DOJ considers invoking the KKK Act against Don Lemon for alleged involvement in a church protest.
Protesters accused of anti-Christian intimidation; Lemon claims journalistic protection.
Harmeet Dhillon leads investigation; potential charges under the FACE and KKK Acts.
Critics argue the move is politically motivated against free press.

DOJ’s Potential Charges Against Don Lemon

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is weighing charges against former CNN anchor Don Lemon under the Ku Klux Klan Act, an unprecedented step that has stirred significant debate. The charges stem from Lemon’s livestream of a protest at Cities Church in Minneapolis, where anti-ICE activists disrupted a Sunday service. The DOJ, led by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, accuses Lemon of inciting the disturbance, framing his actions as unprotected by journalistic privilege.

This development comes after a fatal incident involving ICE and Minneapolis resident Renee Good, which heightened tensions and sparked protests. The Radical Justice Network accused Pastor David Eastwood of collaborating with ICE, leading to a heated confrontation during the church service. Lemon’s role in broadcasting the event live has positioned him at the center of DOJ scrutiny, with potential implications for journalistic freedoms.

Legal Framework and Implications

The Ku Klux Klan Act, originally enacted to combat post-Civil War racial violence, rarely surfaces in modern legal contexts, making its potential use against Lemon a significant legal escalation. Traditionally, the act targets conspiracies to violate civil rights, a charge that DOJ officials contend fits the alleged actions of protesters and Lemon. Additionally, the FACE Act, designed to protect worship activities, underscores the seriousness of the DOJ’s investigation.

Critics argue that employing such robust legal tools against a journalist could chill free speech and protest coverage. The Trump administration’s tough stance on immigration and related activism further complicates the narrative, as supporters view the DOJ’s actions as necessary to uphold law and order, while opponents see them as politically charged.

Reactions and Political Ramifications

Conservative figures, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, have expressed support for the investigation, emphasizing the protection of religious freedoms. Bondi highlighted the need for “the full force of federal law” against those perceived to threaten Christian communities. Meanwhile, Lemon maintains his innocence, asserting his actions were in line with journalistic duties and protected under the First Amendment.

The unfolding situation underscores the delicate balance between national security, religious rights, and press freedoms, with potential long-term effects on how protests and media coverage are handled in politically sensitive contexts. As the investigation progresses, its outcome could set a precedent for future cases involving protest journalism and government accountability.