“Journalism is printing something that someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations.” – George Orwell
The First Amendment to the Constitution was written with clarity and intent. “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”
By now, you’ve probably read and heard quite a bit of hemming and hawing over the arrest of Don Lemon, as well as three other journalists, in connection to an anti-ICE protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. Lemon, of course, being a former CNN anchor, gets the most prominence in this incident, but despite Lemon’s celebrity status, the fact remains: they (federal agents) are arresting journalists.
Lemon’s contention is that he was covering the protest as a journalist, and the record shows, that he interviewed the pastor, as well as others present in the congregation, and protesters. Now, as someone who has reported on protests, works in the news media and quite very much enjoys the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment, all of this is extremely alarming, as it has sounded the alarm bell to many others – from those with big platforms to private citizens weighing in on social media – that independent accountability reporting is in danger, and that the Trump administration is actively trying to intimidate the Fourth Estate.
Prior to Lemon’s arrest last Friday, a federal magistrate judge declined to approve the arrest, and cited a lack of evidence, and the chief federal appeals court judge in Minnesota rejected a prosecutor’s appeal of the decision, and wrote there was no evidence of any criminal behavior in Lemon’s work.
The footage of Lemon at the protest, which is widely available for all to see, does not show him as a participant in the chants that disrupted the service, and even the Washington Post weighed in, and corroborated that factoid.
But leave it to a federal grand jury in Minnesota to indict Lemon and the other three on charges related to interrupting a religious service, and as it happens, according to reports, an ICE official, David Easterwood, apparently serves as pastor of said church.
The case against Lemon and the others will, no doubt, be dismissed, as it is without merit, but still, this is a bad sign. Courts have, time and time again, affirmed that journalists have broad latitude to gather news and to question those in power without fear of retaliation.
There’s a reason why the freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment place it at the pole position upon the Bill of Rights. A free press is not just some decorative feature of our democratic republic; not something to flash at communist states with a playground “nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-boo-boo!” with their state-ran media. It is, in fact, one of the load-bearing pillars, and is an explicit protection because our founding fathers understood that power, if left unchecked and unaccountable, will seek to silence scrutiny.
Whenever journalism terrifies politicians to the extent that they want to jail journalists, the voters need to ask: what is it that they are so afraid of?
There is no justification for arresting journalists – whether a celebrity like Don Lemon, or independent reporters like the other three. All this is about is silencing someone who is critical of the current administration.
The First Amendment does not exist to just protect journalism that is convenient, polite or favorable to those in authority. Instead, it exists precisely to protect reporting that might be, at times, uncomfortable, adversarial and disruptive to entrenched power.
When reporting on policy and its makers, as well as the ink slung about those subjects on the op-ed pages, I always harken back to a phrase I heard Donnis Baggett utter once upon a time. Baggett, who is a bulldog for governmental transparency, working for the Texas Press Association, said it is the responsibility of the press to “thank ‘em or spank ‘em” when it comes to politicians.
Whenever a journalist is arrested in connection with the performance of their professional role, be that asking questions, documenting events or refusing to be intimidated, the damage extends far beyond the individual who is involved. It sends a clear signal that the state might punish those who dare to be so bold as to observe and report certain goings on.
I’ll admit that I’ve never been a huge fan of Lemon’s work. I haven’t followed him in years, but I did, once upon a time, watch his commentaries on CNN. To me, he came across as a bit smug, and in some ways what a real-deal news personality version of A. Whitney Brown’s commentator on SNL back in the day might be like. Despite whatever I might think of Lemon’s celebrity, his politics, persona or whatever, the principle remains unchanged: Constitutional rights are not scaled by popularity.
The First Amendment still guarantees freedom of the press and prohibits Congress and governmental entities from abridging the right to publish, distribute and gather information. That protection, in 2026, covers newspapers and other print media, digital media, podcasts, etc., and the creators of all that content to fill those types of media from government censorship, restrictions or punishment from distributing information.
So yes, if a well-known journalist can be detained or arrested under questionable circumstances, the message to freelancers, local reports and independent journalists without Lemon’s rock-star bank account, seems exponentially greater.
Even if this weren’t such a ridiculous, bad faith scenario, Lemon still has access to national platforms and great legal representation, so you can imagine how scary it might seem to the little guys who are doing their dead-level best to hold power to account.
Historically, press suppression hasn’t started with mass crackdowns, but isolated incidents that seem designed to test public tolerance. Here in America, such incidents corrode public trust, as the press serves as the eyes and ears of the public, especially in moments of controversy and crisis.
When a journalist is treated as a criminal for doing his or her job, the public is deprived of information, and that is not law and order, but control of the narrative, and if an arrest like this is left unchallenged, then the idea that press freedom is conditional, and granted at the discretion of authorities instead of the Constitution, becomes pervasive.
Whether you or I agree with Don Lemon’s style or not is irrelevant, but what is relevant is a dangerous inversion of foundational American values, and whether or not journalists can continue to do the work without handcuffs looming in the background.
Defending journalists and the work they do is not an act of partisanship, but one of Constitutional preservation.
Chris Edwards is editor of the Tyler County Booster, a sister newspaper in the Polk County Publishing Group. He can be reached at cedwards@polkcountypublishing.com.
