adminDon Lemon’s arrest last week by federal agents has exposed a raw, uncomfortable truth about how the left’s favorite press figures operate when the cameras are rolling. Federal prosecutors say Lemon was arrested in Los Angeles in connection with a protest that disrupted worship at Cities Church in St. Paul and that he faces charges including violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act and conspiracy against rights. The mainstream narrative that this is simply an attack on journalism collapses once you read the indictment and see the livestream evidence prosecutors cited.
According to the court filings, prosecutors contend Lemon didn’t just observe; they say he livestreamed the planning, thanked organizers, moved among participants during the operation, and asked pointed questions that prosecutors describe as part of an effort to intimidate worshippers. A magistrate judge initially balked at approving charges, but a grand jury later returned an indictment — the Justice Department believes there’s enough to proceed. Lemon insists he was only doing his job as a journalist, but the charges allege more than passive reporting.
This case turns on a 1994 law most Americans associate with defending clinics from violent blockades, the FACE Act, which also protects people exercising religious freedom at houses of worship. That statute was never meant to be a political cudgel, and yet here it is being deployed in a highly political environment — a sign that laws can be twisted into tools of convenience when one party controls the levers of law enforcement. Whether you like Lemon or loathe him, the broader concern is how selectively applied statutes warp public trust in fair enforcement.
Enter Megyn Kelly’s blunt question: would the “free speech warriors” who howl for Lemon’s liberty be so quick to defend her if she had done the very same thing inside an abortion clinic? That rhetorical punch lands because it exposes the double standard perfectly: when the leftist celebrity reporter does the interrupting, it’s “bearing witness,” but when a conservative does it at an abortion site it’s a criminal act. Kelly’s point is not rhetorical cowardice — it’s about consistent principle versus partisan privilege.
Americans tired of elites will spot the hypocrisy immediately. Media institutions and their allies on the left demand absolute latitude for reporters when it fits their narrative, yet scream for prosecution when conservatives exercise similar tactics. We shouldn’t fetishize journalists as above the law; if someone crosses the line from reporting into coordination or intimidation, the law should be blind — not a partisan sword. Opinion and outrage are fine; impunity is not.
There are real, chilling stakes here beyond Don Lemon’s fate. Press freedom is precious, but it was never intended to be a shield for political activism that intentionally disrupts fundamental liberties like worship. Prominent media groups and civil-rights voices have denounced the charges as overreach, and while that debate should continue, conservatives must insist on a single standard: defend the First Amendment broadly, and oppose weaponizing statutes for political theater.
If the Justice Department’s message is that one side gets to storm a room and the other side gets prosecuted, then we are handing authority over to whim and faction. Conservatives should reject both the lawless behavior and the selective outrage; demand fair application of the law, insist journalists are not untouchable, and call out the double standards whenever the elites try to excuse what would be criminal if you or I did it. America deserves equal justice, not headline-driven favoritism.
