U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Bid to Expand Charges Over Minnesota Church Protest

BY MIRABEL ODETA

A U.S. appeals court has rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to bring charges against five additional people accused of disrupting a church service in Minnesota earlier this month, according to court documents released on Saturday. The decision highlights growing judicial resistance to the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to prosecute those involved in the protest and marks another setback for federal prosecutors pursuing the case.

The ruling came from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which declined to intervene after federal prosecutors sought emergency approval of arrest warrants that had already been denied by a lower court. The demonstrators are accused of interrupting a Sunday church service to protest what they described as a pastor’s apparent ties to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, an issue that has fueled heightened tensions amid the administration’s expanded immigration enforcement campaign.

Earlier in the week, a federal magistrate judge refused to authorize arrest warrants for the five proposed defendants, citing insufficient evidence to support the charges. Among those named was former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who recorded the demonstration. While the judge allowed charges to proceed against three alleged organizers of the protest, the court rejected a proposed allegation that the group physically obstructed a house of worship, narrowing the scope of the case.

The Justice Department responded by taking the unusual step of asking both the chief trial judge in Minnesota and the appeals court to step in immediately and override the magistrate’s decision. Prosecutors argued that swift action was necessary to prevent similar disruptions of church services in the future, an argument that failed to persuade the courts.

Chief U.S. District Court Judge Patrick Schiltz described the Justice Department’s request as extraordinary, calling it “unheard of in our district” and unprecedented within the jurisdiction of the 8th Circuit, which covers seven U.S. states.

The three-judge panel on the appeals court unanimously agreed not to intervene. Although Judge Leonard Steven Grasz wrote that prosecutors appeared to have sufficient evidence to justify charges against the additional individuals, he emphasized that there were established legal avenues to pursue those charges without seeking intervention from the appeals court.

The case has attracted national attention as the Trump administration presses forward with a sweeping immigration crackdown in Minnesota and beyond, while senior officials have publicly pledged to protect Christian worship services from disruption. Critics, however, argue that the prosecution is politically motivated and aimed at silencing dissent.

The three defendants who were charged — activists Nekima Levy Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen and William Kelly — face accusations of conspiracy against rights for allegedly intimidating and harassing parishioners during the protest. All three have denied wrongdoing and accused the administration of retaliating against them for exercising their right to protest.

Despite the latest ruling, the Justice Department still has options. Prosecutors can seek approval from a federal grand jury to bring additional charges or return to the magistrate judge with new or expanded evidence. A spokesperson for the department did not immediately respond to a request for comment, leaving questions about the next steps in a case that continues to test the limits of federal prosecutorial authority.