Don Lemon fights St. Paul church protest case

A federal court will soon decide whether to throw out the case against two journalists and everybody else connected to the January protest at a St. Paul church. The defendants went to City's church because an ICE field director was its pastor. Federal prosecutors charged them with violating a 1994 law designed mainly to protect abortion clinics. Fox 9's Corin Hart was in court for all of the arguments today, and he is live at the courthouse right now. Corin, what is the basis for the request to dismiss the case? Randy and Kelsey, there were four bases that were given by Don Lemon and Georgia Fort and the attorneys for them. Four reasons to dismiss this case and their co-defendants, 36 of them, also joined in on at least one or two. But Lemon and Fort specifically said they should have First Amendment protections because they are Journalists and even the government's own grand jury indictment seem to acknowledge that. But federal prosecutors in the courtroom did not seem to acknowledge that. And they said there's absolutely no First Amendment protection for a journalist participating in a crime. They called Lemon and Fort's actions un-American. The Fort and Lemons defense attorneys are also moving to dismiss the case as a vindictive prosecution against the president's perceived enemies. Defense attorney Joe Thompson, who was a temporary head of President Trump's DOJ in Minnesota and who quit during Operation Metro Surge, said he spent 17 years at DOJ and he never saw the type of obvious political interference that he's seen in the last year or two. Prosecutors say the journalists were not singled out because there are 36 other defendants, but Thompson and other defense attorneys said the charges resulted from political pressure. The prosecutor kind of revealed the motive too. He claimed that the target of the protest, this pastor who's a high-ranking local ICE officer, wasn't there, but he was still a victim. So that really hinges about where all this is at. The magistrate caught that and said, well, how can he be a victim of obstructing a religious service when he wasn't even in the service? And yet they're trying to push that because that's what this is all about. People are being prosecuted because they protested against someone who was an official in the Trump regime. Now all the defense attorneys argue the government failed to state an offense, so the case should be dismissed against all of them, and here's what they mean by that. Prosecutors don't say anyone committed any violence at the church, but they claim the protesters' crime happened when they quote, largely surrounded the congregation, and some of the parishioners were scared, so they say that constitutes a use of force. Defense attorneys say largely surrounded does not meet the standard for obstruction because people still have the ability to move around without danger. So they say the government didn't actually charge anyone with a valid crime. And the last argument to dismiss the case was that that section of the law that the government's using to charge this case is unconstitutional. This is the first time the place of worship section of the FACE Act has ever been charged in 32 years since it became law. Defense attorneys argue that part actually violates the Commerce Clause and this type of prosecution should be left to the states. Prosecutors though repeatedly said the church is commercial by nature. This one actually sends money to an overarching organization in Tennessee and they want this case to go to a jury. The timeline on a decision? about whether to dismiss the case. Still a little bit cloudy. I talked to a lot of attorneys about it. There's a magistrate who heard it here. He's going to continue to hear arguments for a few more days. Then he's going to make a recommendation to the judge above him, who is the judge overarching on this case. There could be some back and forth between here and there and then some back and forth after that. Ultimately, the attorneys in this case said they're probably not going to get a final decision until about April. In St. Paul, Corin Hoggard, Fox 9. All right, Corin, thank you.