A former federal prosecutor, Joseph H. Thompson, has now taken on a high-profile case involving journalist Don Lemon. This comes after Thompson left his role at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota, where he expressed concerns about the Trump administration’s approach to certain investigations.
Thompson is representing Lemon, who faces charges related to a protest at a church in St. Paul, Minnesota. During this protest, Lemon livestreamed events targeting a pastor accused of working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) amid rising tensions over immigration policy. The government is citing the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act to support their case against Lemon, a statute that generally protects access to reproductive services but also applies to places of worship. Notably, this use of the law against journalists and protesters is unprecedented, according to Harmeet Dhillon, a former civil rights official in the Justice Department.
Before his departure, Thompson managed a successful fraud investigation and criticized the handling of the investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an ICE officer during a federal crackdown in Minneapolis. Thompson’s exit from the Justice Department marks a significant moment—he’s starting a law firm focused on white-collar defense and crisis management, showing a major career shift.
Public and expert reactions to this case have been polarized. Some social media users have defended Lemon, emphasizing the importance of journalistic freedom, while others argue that his involvement in activism during the protest crosses ethical lines for a journalist.
Lemon, who appeared on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” recently, stated that his role was to document events, making a distinction between being a journalist and being a protester. His situation raises questions about the boundaries of press freedom, especially when established legal frameworks like the FACE Act are applied in new contexts.
As this case unfolds, the legal community is watching closely. There is debate about whether the application of the FACE Act in this manner could set a dangerous precedent, possibly influencing how protests and media coverage are conducted in the future.
Lemon’s arraignment is set for this Friday. He plans to plead not guilty to the charges, continuing to challenge the implications of the government’s actions against him as a journalist. The complexities of this case highlight not just the challenges of press freedom, but also the often fraught intersection of politics, law, and civil rights.
For further reading on the implications of the FACE Act and its usage in protests, check out this Justice Department memo.
