A long-standing member of a St. Paul congregation has filed a civil lawsuit against a group of activists and high-profile media figures, alleging that a January protest targeting an immigration agent during a Sunday worship service violated her federal rights and caused “severe and lasting” emotional distress.
The plaintiff, Ann Doucette, filed the suit in Minnesota District Court this week. The complaint names prominent local activist Nekima Levy-Armstrong, several other protesters, and journalist Don Lemon as defendants. The lawsuit stems from an incident at Cities Church in St. Paul, where protesters disrupted a service to confront a parishioner who serves as a Special Agent for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“A Place of Sanctuary Violated”
According to the lawsuit and corroborated by a related federal criminal affidavit, the protest occurred during the height of “Operation Metro Surge,” a federal immigration enforcement initiative. Doucette alleges that the defendants entered the sanctuary during active worship, shouting political slogans and filming congregants without their consent.
The complaint argues that the disruption was not a peaceful exercise of the First Amendment, but a targeted campaign of harassment that violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. While commonly associated with reproductive health facilities, the FACE Act also provides federal protection against the use of force, threats of force, or physical obstruction that intentionally interferes with the exercise of religious beliefs at a place of religious worship.
“For Mrs. Doucette, the church was the one place she felt safe from the divisions of the world,” the filing states. “That sense of security was shattered when defendants transformed a solemn service into a chaotic scene of intimidation.”
The lawsuit describes a scene of significant distress. Doucette claims that protesters screamed “Nazi” in the faces of congregants and confronted children, telling them their parents were “going to burn in hell.” The filing mirrors details found in a federal criminal complaint filed by DHS Special Agent Timothy Gerber, who was the primary target of the protest. In that affidavit, witnesses—referred to as “victims”—described the event as “surreal,” noting that children were left “traumatized” and crying as agitators followed families to their cars in the parking lot.
Weighting the Impact on Parishioners
Supporters of Doucette argue that the lawsuit is a necessary stand against the “weaponization” of protest inside private, religious spaces. Legal representatives for the plaintiff suggest that by naming media figures like Don Lemon—who was reportedly filming a segment at the time—the suit seeks to hold accountable those who “incentivize” disruptive behavior for the sake of a broadcast.
“There is a line between reporting the news and participating in the creation of a hostile environment,” said a legal analyst familiar with the case. “The plaintiff’s argument is that the presence of high-profile cameras encouraged the protesters to be more aggressive, further violating the sanctity of the worship service.”
The emotional toll cited in the suit is extensive. Doucette alleges she has suffered from insomnia and anxiety since the incident, fearing that protesters will return or target her home. The federal affidavit notes that at least one parishioner expressed fear that their face was now on the church’s website and that “agitators” would follow them home at night. One witness recalled their child asking, “Daddy, I thought you were going to die.”
The Defendants’ Perspective
The defendants and their supporters maintain that the protest was a moral necessity. Nekima Levy-Armstrong and other activists have long argued that the presence of an ICE agent in a local congregation makes the church complicit in the “terrorization” of the immigrant community.
“When a member of a congregation is actively involved in separating families and conducting mass arrests, that is not a private matter,” Levy-Armstrong said in a statement following the incident. “The community has a right to demand accountability from the institutions that harbor these individuals.”
Representatives for Don Lemon have pushed back against the lawsuit, characterizing it as a threat to press freedom. They argue that Lemon was acting strictly as a journalist, documenting a matter of significant public interest, and did not direct or participate in the disruption himself. Supporters of the media defendants argue that journalists cannot be held liable for the actions of the subjects they are covering.
Legal Precedent and Federal Charges
The civil lawsuit arrives as federal authorities move forward with their own criminal cases. A federal grand jury has already indicted several of the protesters, including Levy-Armstrong, on charges of conspiracy against rights and violations of the FACE Act.
The criminal affidavit filed by Special Agent Gerber highlights the gravity of the incident from the government’s perspective, noting that the disruption was not merely an interruption of a service but a concerted effort to intimidate a federal officer and his religious community.
While the criminal case focuses on the intent to interfere with federal duties, Doucette’s civil suit focuses on the personal damages suffered by the “ordinary citizens” caught in the crossfire. By centering the experience of a parishioner, the lawsuit asks the court to decide whether political protest, however deeply felt, can legally cross the threshold of a church door.
As of Thursday evening, Cities Church has not officially joined the lawsuit as a plaintiff, but church leadership has previously issued statements condemning the “harassment of our families” and reaffirming their commitment to the safety of their members.
The case is expected to draw national attention as a test of the protections afforded to religious institutions under federal law in an era of high-stakes political activism.
