Breaking stories and in‑depth analysis: up‑to‑the‑minute global news on politics, business, technology, culture, and more—24/7, all in one place.
“`html
Nine Arrested Following Church Protest Over Immigration Policy
Table of Contents
- 1. Nine Arrested Following Church Protest Over Immigration Policy
- 2. The Protest and Initial Arrests
- 3. Journalist Involvement and Federal Charges
- 4. details from the Indictment
- 5. The Church’s Connection to ICE
- 6. Legal Representation and Ongoing Examination
- 7. Understanding the legal Implications
- 8. What federal charges have been filed against the individuals arrested at St. Paul’s Church in Minneapolis?
- 9. Nine Arrested in St. Paul Church ICE Protest; U.S. Attorney General Adds Two More Names
St. Paul, Minnesota – Federal authorities have announced the arrests of nine individuals linked to a protest held at the Cities Church in St. Paul on January 18th. The demonstrations stemmed from objections to immigration enforcement policies and have sparked a national debate about the intersection of faith, activism, and federal jurisdiction. The initial arrests occurred earlier in the week, and two more were confirmed Monday by officials.
The Protest and Initial Arrests
The protest, which disrupted a church service, centered around calls to end ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) activities and to seek justice for Renee good, a 37-year-old mother fatally shot by an ICE officer in Minneapolis. Protesters chanted slogans like “ICE out” during the service, leading to the initial interventions by law enforcement. Nekima Levy Armstrong,a prominent local activist,was among the first to be taken into custody.
Journalist Involvement and Federal Charges
The situation gained heightened attention with the arrest of Don lemon, a former CNN host now working as an independent journalist, and Georgia Fort. Lemon maintained he was present solely as a documentarian, observing the protest. Though, court documents allege a more direct connection, suggesting he was with Jerome Deangelo Richardson, another arrestee, during the exhibition. Both Lemon and Fort were among four arrested on Friday.
All nine individuals now face federal charges, including conspiracy and the interference with the First Amendment rights of worshippers. These charges were outlined in a grand jury indictment unsealed Friday, signaling a serious federal response to the incident.
details from the Indictment
The indictment details specific actions attributed to the arrestees. Ian Davis Austin is accused of confronting a pastor with questions about Christian nationalism while standing in the church aisles. Richardson allegedly communicated with Lemon while streaming the event, coordinating their movements within the church.Austin was arrested Friday, while the timing of Richardson’s arrest remains unclear.
The Church’s Connection to ICE
A key element of the controversy surrounding the protest is the dual role of David Easterwood, a pastor at Cities Church, who also serves as the field office director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in St. Paul. This connection fueled the protesters’ decision to target the Cities Church specifically, viewing it as a symbolic representation of the intersection between religious institutions and immigration enforcement. The Southern Baptist Convention is the affiliation of Cities Church.
Legal Representation and Ongoing Examination
Sarah Gad, Austin’s attorney, has not yet issued a statement. Court records do not currently list legal representation for Richardson. The Justice department initiated its investigation instantly following the disruption of the church service.
Understanding the legal Implications
| Charge | Potential penalties |
|---|---|
| Conspiracy | Up to 5 years in federal prison |
| Interference with First Amendment Rights | Fines and/or up to 10 years in federal prison |
These potential penalties underscore the seriousness with which federal authorities are treating the actions of the protesters. Cases involving First Amendment rights are highly sensitive and often draw notable public scrutiny.
The increasing tension around immigration policy continues to inspire direct action and protests across the nation. According to data from the American Civil Liberties Union, arrests at immigration protests have risen 15% in the past year.
Do you believe protests within places of worship are ever justified? How should law enforcement balance the rights of protesters with the rights of worshippers to practice their faith undisturbed?
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to Archyde.com for updates as thay become available.
What federal charges have been filed against the individuals arrested at St. Paul’s Church in Minneapolis?
Nine Arrested in St. Paul Church ICE Protest; U.S. Attorney General Adds Two More Names
the Escalating Legal Ramifications of Sanctuary Support
On February 2nd,2026,the situation surrounding the ongoing protest at St. Paul’s Church in Minneapolis took a significant turn. Initial reports indicated nine individuals were arrested following a demonstration organized in support of a Guatemalan man, Jose Manuel Hernandez, facing deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Today,February 3rd,2026,the U.S. Attorney General announced the addition of two more names to the list of those facing federal charges.
Details of the Arrests & Initial Charges
The protest,which began nearly a week ago,saw members of faith communities and immigration advocacy groups occupying St. Paul’s Church, offering sanctuary to Hernandez. The initial arrests stemmed from charges of trespassing and obstruction of justice. According to Minneapolis Police Department statements, repeated requests to peacefully vacate the premises were ignored, leading to the intervention of law enforcement.
* Trespassing: A misdemeanor offense, carrying potential fines and jail time.
* Obstruction of Justice: A more serious charge, potentially leading to significant penalties, particularly if deemed to have interfered with federal immigration enforcement.
* Disorderly Conduct: Several arrests also included this charge, relating to disruptive behavior during the protest.
Witness accounts suggest a largely peaceful demonstration, though police reports detail instances of resistance during the arrest process. Legal observers from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) were present and are providing legal support to those detained.
Attorney General’s expansion of Charges
The involvement of the U.S. Attorney General marks a clear escalation in the federal government’s response to the situation. The two additional individuals named face charges of “harboring an alien,” a federal crime under 8 U.S. Code § 1324. This charge alleges that the protesters knowingly concealed and assisted Hernandez,hindering his deportation proceedings.
This expansion of charges signals a potential shift in strategy, moving beyond local offenses to federal prosecution, which carries potentially harsher penalties.legal experts suggest this move is intended to deter similar acts of sanctuary and to reinforce the federal government’s authority over immigration enforcement.
The “Harboring” Charge: A Closer Look
The “harboring” statute is complex and has been the subject of legal debate for years. To secure a conviction, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants:
- Knew Hernandez was subject to deportation.
- Actively concealed him from ICE agents.
- Provided assistance with the intent to hinder his deportation.
Defense attorneys are expected to argue that providing shelter within a church, motivated by religious conviction and humanitarian concerns, does not constitute “harboring” under the law. Thay will likely emphasize the First Amendment rights to freedom of religion and assembly.
Previous Cases & legal Precedents
Similar cases involving sanctuary movements have faced varying degrees of success in court. In 2019, a federal judge dismissed charges against several individuals in Arizona accused of harboring undocumented immigrants, citing a lack of evidence demonstrating intent to obstruct immigration enforcement. However, other cases have resulted in convictions, particularly when evidence suggests active concealment and assistance in evading authorities.
Impact on sanctuary Movements
This case is being closely watched by sanctuary movements across the country.The Attorney General’s decision to pursue federal charges is likely to have a chilling affect, potentially discouraging faith communities and organizations from offering sanctuary to individuals facing deportation.
The Role of Faith-Based Activism in Immigration Reform
Historically, faith-based organizations have played a significant role in advocating for immigration reform and providing support to immigrant communities. The sanctuary movement, rooted in religious principles of compassion and hospitality, represents a direct challenge to federal immigration policies.
* Historical Precedent: The concept of offering sanctuary dates back centuries, with churches historically providing refuge to those fleeing persecution.
* Moral and Ethical Considerations: Supporters argue that providing sanctuary is a moral imperative, reflecting core religious values.
* Political Advocacy: The movement also serves as a form of political protest, raising awareness about the human cost of strict immigration enforcement.
Ongoing Developments & Future Outlook
The legal proceedings are expected to be lengthy and contentious. Bail hearings for the eleven individuals are scheduled for later this week. Immigration advocacy groups are organizing rallies and fundraising efforts to support the defendants.The case is likely to become a focal point in the ongoing debate over immigration policy and the role of sanctuary movements in challenging federal authority. Updates will be provided as the situation develops.
