The legal storm surrounding Don Lemon took a sharp turn Friday as veteran defense attorney Alan Dershowitz weighed in on the federal charges, predicting a rocky road ahead for prosecutors.
Speaking on Newsmax’s “The Record with Greta Van Susteren,” the Harvard Law School professor emeritus argued that despite the high-profile nature of Lemon’s arrest, the government’s case likely lacks the teeth needed to secure a criminal conviction.
The drama unfolded late Thursday when federal agents took Lemon into custody in Los Angeles. While he was released without bond the following day, the charges looming over him are significant: conspiracy to violate constitutional rights and violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.
READ: Former CNN Host Don Lemon Charged Under KKK And FACE Act
The indictment stems from a January 18 incident where anti-ICE protesters disrupted a service at Cities Church in St. Paul, an event Lemon covered and later broadcast on his YouTube channel.
Dershowitz, a man who has spent decades navigating the intersection of the First Amendment and criminal law, told Van Susteren that the prosecution has a “steep burden” to climb. He emphasized that the law provides a massive safety net for journalists, even when they find themselves in the middle of chaotic or illegal protest activities.
According to Dershowitz, there is a massive gulf between a reporter potentially making a questionable ethical call and a person actually committing a crime. He noted that while Lemon’s actions might raise eyebrows in a journalism classroom, proving “beyond a reasonable doubt” that he was a co-conspirator or complicit in the church disruption is another matter entirely.
READ: CNN’s Brian Stelter Says Don Lemon Had Prior Knowledge Of Minnesota Church Raid
The case hits on a sensitive legal nerve regarding the FACE Act, which is designed to prevent people from using force or physical obstruction to interfere with someone’s right to practice their religion.
Prosecutors point to the fact that Lemon arrived at the church during a livestream and made comments suggesting he knew the protesters’ destination. Lemon, however, maintains he was simply doing his job as a reporter.
Dershowitz didn’t pull punches when comparing the current climate to historical movements. He noted that while figures like Martin Luther King Jr. accepted the consequences of civil disobedience, the modern era of protest feels different—and legally more complex. He compared the current disruptions to the efforts of those who tried to block integration in the 1960s, though he maintained that regardless of the morality of the act, the legal evidence against Lemon specifically appears thin.
Ultimately, the case may come down to whether a journalist can be held responsible for the actions of the group they are following. If Dershowitz is right, the government’s footage might show a disruption, but it won’t be enough to prove a crime.
As the legal process moves forward, the boundary between documenting a crime and participating in one remains the central question that will determine Don Lemon’s future.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
