Minnesota AG Keith Ellison Faces Backlash Over Response to Church Protest
ST. PAUL, Minn. — Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has come under intense scrutiny after his recent comments regarding a disruptive protest at Cities Church in St. Paul. Ellison declared that the actions of the protesters, who interrupted worship services, did not warrant federal prosecution and described their conduct as “First Amendment activity.” This stance has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and religious freedom advocates who argue that it undermines the rule of law and the right to peaceful worship.
During an interview with CNN, Ellison expressed reluctance to enforce state laws related to trespassing and disorderly conduct against the protesters, signaling a selective approach to law enforcement. The incident at Cities Church involved a mob entering the place of worship, disrupting services, and raising concerns about the safety and religious freedoms of congregants.
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, sharply criticized Ellison’s response, stating that excusing mob behavior in a house of worship “tramples religious freedom.” Turley highlighted Ellison’s history of controversial statements and associations, including past support for groups linked to political unrest. Notably, Ellison previously endorsed Antifa, a group known for violent protests, and has faced backlash for publicly supporting extremist figures.
Ellison’s son, Minneapolis City Council member Jeremiah Ellison, also publicly supported Antifa during protests last summer, further fueling debate about the Attorney General’s impartiality in enforcing laws against politically motivated groups. Critics argue that this pattern of selective enforcement risks normalizing mob rule and threatens the constitutional protections guaranteed to all citizens.
The controversy comes amid broader national discussions about balancing First Amendment rights with public order and safety. The Department of Justice has emphasized the importance of protecting free speech while also enforcing laws against trespass and disorderly conduct. Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union has repeatedly underscored that the right to protest does not extend to violating others’ rights or breaking the law.
Religious organizations and leaders across Minnesota have expressed alarm over the incident and the Attorney General’s response. Many view the disruption as an affront to religious liberty, a fundamental right protected under the First Amendment. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and other faith groups have called for stronger protections against such invasions of worship spaces.
St. Paul police conducted initial investigations into the protest, but with the state Attorney General signaling reluctance to pursue charges, questions remain about accountability. The Minnesota Department of Public Safety has reiterated its commitment to upholding laws that protect places of worship from unlawful intrusion.
As Minnesota grapples with this contentious issue, the debate highlights the challenges officials face in navigating politically charged protests while safeguarding constitutional rights. Ellison’s critics warn that excusing mob conduct risks eroding public trust in law enforcement and emboldening future disruptions that threaten the safety and freedoms of communities across the state.
Leave a Reply