Anti-ICE church protest
Executive summary
A group of roughly 30–40 anti‑ICE protesters entered Cities Church in St. Paul during a Sunday service and chanted slogans including "ICE out" and "Justice for Renee Good," prompting a Department of Justice civil‑rights inquiry and local disorderly‑conduct investigations [1] [2] [3]. The incident has become a national flashpoint, with religious leaders condemning the disruption, DOJ officials promising prosecution under statutes such as the FACE Act, and advocates framing the action as a moral response to recent federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota [4] [5] [6].
1. What occurred inside the church and how it was documented
Video livestreamed by Black Lives Matter Minnesota and coverage from multiple outlets shows demonstrators interrupting the service at Cities Church, moving into the sanctuary and chanting as congregants and pastors reacted; police arrived after the group had largely left the building [2] [6] [1]. Reporting consistently notes chants heard inside the sanctuary — "ICE out," "Justice for Renee Good," and "Hands up, don't shoot" — and that the disturbance was recorded and circulated widely, including a live stream by former anchor Don Lemon [7] [2] [8].
2. Why protesters say they targeted this church
Protesters told congregants they believed one of the church’s pastors, David Easterwood, serves as the acting ICE field office director in the St. Paul region, and they connected the protest to outrage over the Jan. 7 fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent; media reporting links the action to broader anger at stepped‑up ICE operations in Minnesota [6] [3] [9]. Organizers such as Black Lives Matter Minnesota and local activists including Nekima Levy Armstrong have framed the interruption as a direct challenge to what they call the moral hypocrisy of an ICE official appearing in a place of worship [2] [10].
3. Federal and local legal responses
The Justice Department opened an investigation into the disruption as a potential violation of federal law, with DOJ officials and the Civil Rights Division saying they will examine whether protesters obstructed the right to religious worship and whether statutes like the FACE Act apply; Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly vowed enforcement [4] [6] [9]. Local police described the matter as an active disorderly conduct investigation after officers responded and found the protesters had moved outside by the time of arrival [1] [11].
4. Reactions from faith leaders, political actors and media
Christian leaders and denominational figures condemned the disruption as unacceptable and urged protection for worshippers' rights, while some faith leaders also expressed tension between protecting congregations and acknowledging migrants' suffering — a split reflected across coverage from Fox, NBC, Religion Unplugged and others [5] [12] [7]. Conservative outlets framed the protesters as a "left‑wing mob" and emphasized criminal investigation and federal enforcement; advocates and civil‑rights voices emphasized accountability for ICE and justice for Renee Good, underscoring how coverage and rhetoric map onto partisan and institutional agendas [8] [3] [10].
5. Broader context and competing narratives
The protest did not occur in isolation: Minnesota has seen intensified anti‑ICE demonstrations after the killing of Renee Good and a surge in ICE activity, and federal officials have pursued a strong law‑and‑order response while local leaders have urged peaceful protest — a dynamic that fuels competing narratives about legitimate dissent versus unlawful disruption [3] [11] [1]. Media accounts reveal implicit agendas: law‑enforcement and DOJ statements emphasize criminality and protection of worship, activist organizers center moral outrage and ICE accountability, and some outlets amplify partisan frames that serve political aims [4] [2] [8].
6. What reporting does not yet settle
Sources confirm that Easterwood has been listed as a pastor on the church website and has been publicly identified with ICE in prior DHS events, but available reporting does not establish whether he was present during the service or directly involved in recent operations on the day of the protest — facts that DOJ investigators and local authorities may clarify as inquiries proceed [6] [2] [9]. Likewise, while multiple outlets report the size and behavior of the protest and ensuing investigations, court filings and formal charging decisions were not reported in the sources reviewed here [1] [11].