Former CNN journalist Don Lemon arrested in connection with Minnesota protest
Don Lemon attends the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights’ 2025 Ripple of Hope Gala at New York Hilton on December 09, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by Astrid Stawiarz/Getty Images for RFK Ripple Of Hope)
(NEW YORK) — Former CNN journalist Don Lemon was arrested early Friday morning in connection with an incident in which anti-ICE protesters disrupted a service at a Minnesota church, according to Attorney General Pam Bondi.
The incident unfolded on Jan. 18, when protesters entered Cities Church in St. Paul. The protesters said one of the pastors is the acting field director of the St. Paul ICE field office.
Bondi said on social media that Lemon and three others were arrested early Friday “at my direction” “in connection with the coordinated attack on Cities Church.”
At least three additional people were previously arrested in connection with the protest.
Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said last week that a magistrate judge rejected charges against Lemon. A source told ABC News that Bondi last week was “enraged” at the magistrate judge’s decision to not charge the journalist.
Lowell said on Friday that Lemon was taken into custody by federal agents while he was covering the Grammy Awards.
“Don has been a journalist for 30 years, and his constitutionally protected work in Minneapolis was no different than what he has always done,” Lowell said in a statement. “The First Amendment exists to protect journalists whose role it is to shine light on the truth and hold those in power accountable.”
“Instead of investigating the federal agents who killed two peaceful Minnesota protesters, the Trump Justice Department is devoting its time, attention and resources to this case,” Lowell said, calling the arrest an “attempt to distract attention from the many crises facing this administration.”
Lowell called Lemon’s arrest an “unprecedented attack on the First Amendment” and said the journalist “will fight these charges vigorously and thoroughly in court.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(NEW YORK) — New York’s intermediate appellate court should overturn President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money convictions because his trial was “fatally marred” by faulty evidence and overseen by a judge who should have recused himself, his attorneys argued in a court filing late Monday.
Trump’s formal appeal, 17 months after a Manhattan jury found him guilty of 34 felony counts, asks the Appellate Division’s First Department to reverse what his lawyers call the “most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history.”
Trump was found guilty in May 2024 after a six-week trial over a scheme to conceal a $130,000 payment his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to keep her from talking about a long-denied affair ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Trump reimbursed Cohen in monthly installments that prosecutors said amounted to falsified records.
“The DA, a Democrat, brought those charges in the middle of a contentious Presidential election in which President Trump was the leading Republican candidate. These charges against President Trump were as unprecedented as their political context,” Trump’s attorneys at the white shoe law firm Sullivan & Cromwell wrote in their appeal.
Under New York state law, falsifying business records becomes a felony if the records were falsified to commit or conceal another crime. The appeal accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of trying to “twist New York law” to persuade the jury that Trump violated election statutes.
“Targeting alleged conduct that has never been found to violate any New York law, the DA concocted a purported felony by stacking time-barred misdemeanors under a convoluted legal theory, which the DA then improperly obscured until the charge conference. This case should never have seen the inside of a courtroom, let alone resulted in a conviction,” the appeal argued.
Leaning into a decision by the Supreme Court made after the trial that limited the use of evidence related to a president’s “official acts,” Trump’s lawyers also argued the New York Judge Juan Merchan erred by allowing evidence protected by presidential immunity. According to Trump’s lawyers, testimony from Trump’s former communications director Hope Hicks — later described by prosecutors as “devastating” for Trump — as well as evidence taken from his Twitter account and other protected conversations were improperly considered by the jury.
“The trial was fatally marred by the introduction of official Presidential acts that the Supreme Court has made clear cannot be used as evidence against a President,” the appeal said.
The appeal also took aim at Judge Merchan, arguing that a $15 donation he made to President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and another $20 in donations to Democratic-aligned organizations demonstrated political bias. Before the trial, the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics concluded that those donations — as well as Merchan’s daughter’s work for a digital ad agency that worked with Democratic officials — did not create a conflict for Merchan.
Following Trump’s conviction, Judge Merchan, on the eve of Trump’s inauguration, sentenced him to an unconditional discharge — the lightest possible punishment allowed under New York state law — saying it was the “only lawful sentence” to prevent “encroaching upon the highest office in the land.”
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge has barred the Trump administration from removing Diana Patricia Santillana Galeano from the United States and transferring her to any federal jurisdiction outside of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, court documents show.
Santillana, 38, was detained at a day care center in Chicago earlier this week. Judge Jeremy C. Daniel has scheduled a hearing in her case on Nov. 13.
Santillana is currently detained at an ICE facility in Clark County, Indiana, her attorney, Charlie Wysong, said in a statement.
(CHICAGO) — Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Charles Exum testified Wednesday that he had no role in the decision to release his government-issued vehicle after it was involved in a collision that led to him shooting a woman on Chicago’s southwest side last month.
“I was told to pick it up, [so] I picked it up,” Exum said, adding that he believed the vehicle had no remaining evidentiary value after it was processed and released by the FBI.
An attorney for the woman disputed Exum’s account, arguing that releasing the vehicle before defense lawyers could inspect it may have led to the destruction of potentially favorable evidence. The lawyer also confronted the agent with text messages Exum sent to friends and family in the days after the incident in which he appeared to boast about his shooting skills.
“I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book, boys,” one of those messages said.
U.S. District Judge Georgia Alexakis ordered the testimony Wednesday in the criminal case against Marimar Martinez, who was shot by the Border Patrol agent — identified for the first time as Exum — on Oct. 4 in the Brighton Park neighborhood. The incident led to chaotic street protests and the deployment of tear gas by federal agents.
Martinez and another man, Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz, are charged with assault with a deadly weapon, accused of following the agents’ vehicles and initiating the collision with Exum’s SUV that led to the shooting. Federal prosecutors contend Exum fired five rounds defensively after Martinez allegedly drove toward him when he exited his vehicle after the crash, according to court filings.
“Moments after exiting the CBP Vehicle, the Martinez Vehicle drove northbound ” at the agent and he “proceeded to fire approximately five shots from his service weapon at the driver of the Martinez Vehicle,” prosecutors wrote in a criminal complaint last month.
Both Martinez and Ruiz have entered not guilty pleas. Martinez’s attorneys contend in court filings that it was the agents’ vehicle that initiated the collision. The government disputes that.
Wednesday’s hearing focused on a defense motion alleging that the federal government may have spoiled or altered evidence when it allowed the damaged vehicle Exum was driving to be released to him and driven back to his home base in Maine, where a Customs and Border Protection mechanic later wiped off black scuff marks after the FBI had processed the SUV in Chicago.
Exum said that after the collision, his government-issued Chevrolet Tahoe had scratches and dents on the driver’s side and black marks on the driver’s door and above the fuel tank. He said the FBI took photographs of his vehicle before it was taken from the scene to an FBI office for further evidence processing.
Prosecutors said in court filings that the FBI took additional photographs of the vehicle at an FBI facility in Chicago. The FBI also took paint chip samples from the Tahoe and downloaded data from the vehicle’s on-board computer before releasing the vehicle to Exum, according to court records.
Exum said he was contacted several hours after the shooting and told that his vehicle was ready to be picked up from an FBI office in downtown Chicago. He testified that a supervisor told him the vehicle had been processed for evidence and cleared for release. When he retrieved it, he said, the SUV appeared to be in the same condition as when it was removed from the scene.
A 23-year Border Patrol veteran stationed in Maine, Exum was on a temporary duty assignment for “Operation Midway Blitz” in Chicago. His assignment began in early September and was scheduled to end in October. He said he stayed an extra day after the incident to be interviewed by the FBI and a prosecutor.
Exum testified that he drove the vehicle back to Maine over three days, arriving at his home duty station on Oct. 10 and parking it in the facility’s garage. He said he did not see the vehicle again until about six days later, when he noticed it had been moved and that the black scuff marks from the collision had been cleaned off. He said he had no prior knowledge of the work and later learned that a supervisor had authorized a mechanic to perform it.
Prosecutors submitted to the court an email from that supervisor to Exum explaining that he had authorized the work on the vehicle to begin “because I thought all the necessary pictures and evidence was [sic] taken in Chicago during the initial investigation.”
Exum said all work on the vehicle was stopped after the FBI informed him it would need to be returned to Chicago under a court order. The vehicle was transported to Chicago on a flatbed truck on Oct 23 and inspected by attorneys for Martinez a week later.
Defense attorney Chris Parente suggested during cross-examination that it was Exum, not his supervisor, who initiated the request for repairs. Parente cited an FBI interview report from Oct. 20 in which the agent wrote that Exum said he had sought approval for the work.
Exum denied that account.
“I did not say that, and I did not get approval for anything,” he testified. “He must have written it down incorrectly or misunderstood.”
Parente also confronted Exum with a series of text messages he sent in the days after the shooting — to his wife, his brother, and a group of fellow agents in a Signal chat. Prosecutors turned over screenshots of the messages to the defense earlier this week.
In one screenshot displayed in court — which included a link to a news article about the shooting — Exum wrote in a group chat: “Read it. Five shots, seven holes.” The message appeared to refer to the number of times Exum shot Martinez.
“So the ‘five shots, seven holes’ is a reference to my argument at the detention hearing that you shot Ms. Martinez five times and there were seven holes. Is that true?” Parente asked.
“I believe that is true,” Exum replied, adding: “I am a firearms instructor, and I take pride in my shooting skills.”
“So you’re bragging that you shot her five times and got seven holes? Are you literally bragging about this?” Parente asked.
“I’m just saying five shots, seven holes,” Exum answered.
In another partially redacted message to the same group, Exum wrote: “I have a MOF amendment to add to my story. I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book, boys.” Exum said “MOF” referred to a nickname used by the group — “Miserable Old F—s.”
Exum testified that the texts to the group were sent as a way of “relieving stress.”
A separate redacted message from Oct. 5, the day after the shooting, read: “Cool. I’m up for another round of ‘f— around and find out.’”
“That means illegal actions have legal consequences,” Exum replied.
Parente pressed Exum on whether such messages were appropriate for a federal officer.
“You’re supposed to protect the lives of U.S. citizens, right?” Parente asked.
“Protect anyone’s life,” Exum replied.
“You know Ms. Martinez is a U.S. citizen, right?”
“I do know,” Exum said.
“And yet this seems like you’re in a support group bragging about the shooting,” Parente said.
“I did what I had to do to save my life,” Exum replied.
Following Exum’s testimony — which did not delve into the specific circumstances of the shooting — Judge Alexakis approved a defense request to hear from the FBI agent in Maine who took Exum’s statement, as well as the FBI agent and federal prosecutor who approved the release of his vehicle just hours after the incident.
“I want to know why an [assistant U.S. attorney] would authorize the release of a vehicle at the center of a media storm in an agent-involved shooting,” Parente said. “It doesn’t comport with my experience, so I think they both have relevant testimony.”
A date for that hearing has not yet been set.
Martinez has been indicted on charges of assaulting a federal officer with a deadly weapon. Prosecutors allege she and Ruiz followed the agents’ SUV for miles and rammed it while Exum and two others were inside.
A DHS statement on the incident emphasized that Martinez “was armed with a semi-automatic weapon and had a history of doxxing federal agents.” The government alleged that the law enforcement officers were “ambushed by domestic terrorists.” The charges against Martinez, however, made no mention of a weapon, and prosecutors have acknowledged in court that the gun was not displayed or possessed by Martinez during the confrontation. It was discovered in her purse when agents searched her vehicle later. Martinez has a license for the gun and a concealed carry permit, according to court records.
