In an emergency, the pastor shouldn’t have operational command; that should be left to the security team. They should have the authority to decide when to evacuate, when to call law enforcement, and when to implement lockdown procedures. This distinction must be established and communicated before any incident occurs.

What Just Happened?

Protesters disrupted a Minnesota church service on Sunday after activists determined one of the pastors works as the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s field office in St. Paul, says the Minnesota Star Tribune. Activists, including some from Black Lives Matter Minnesota, entered the service at Cities Church in St. Paul and chanted, “Justice for Renee Good.” The church is led by Jonathan Parnell, who was confronted on camera and misidentified by former CNN anchor Don Lemon.

Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for the U.S. Department of Justice, announced an investigation of possible criminal violations. Attorney general Pamela Bondi also said,

I just spoke to the Pastor in Minnesota whose church was targeted. Attacks against law enforcement and the intimidation of Christians are being met with the full force of federal law. If state leaders refuse to act responsibly to prevent lawlessness, this Department of Justice Show more

On X, North American Mission Board president Kevin Ezell wrote,

This church is pastored by @SendNetwork ’s city missionary in Minneapolis-St. Paul. It is absurd that protestors would disrupt a Sunday morning worship service. If elected officials won’t contain lawlessness, @NAMB_SBC will provide protection for our churches.

How Common Are Such Disruptions?

According to the Family Research Council, 383 churches endured a combined total of 415 hostile incidents in 2024, including vandalism, arson, armed aggression, and service disruptions. Armed incidents more than doubled from 12 in 2023 to 28 in 2024.

To date, the organization has identified 1,384 acts of hostility toward U.S. churches, occurring between January 2018 and December 2024.

Is a Church a Public Space Where Anyone May Protest?

No. Under U.S. law, churches are private property, even when open to the public for worship. Property owners—including churches—retain the right to set rules for conduct on their premises and to remove individuals who violate those rules.

The Supreme Court held in Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner (1972) that private property doesn’t become a public forum merely by being open to the public. A Connecticut appeals court applied this principle directly to churches in State v. Steinmann (1990), observing that “property does not lose its private character merely because the public is generally invited to use it for designated purposes.” This means speech protected outside the church building (such as on a sidewalk) doesn’t automatically enjoy the same protection inside a sanctuary.

When Does Protest Become Unlawful Inside a Church?

Protest typically becomes unlawful when it involves disruption, refusal to comply with lawful instructions, or interference with religious worship.

Examples commonly recognized in law include interrupting a worship service, shouting or chanting during prayer or preaching, blocking aisles or access points, refusing to leave when asked by church leadership, and attempting to seize microphones or approach the platform. At that point, the issue is no longer political disagreement but becomes a legal issue (e.g., trespass or disorderly conduct).

What Federal Laws Protect Churches from Disruption?

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act, 18 U.S.C. § 248), enacted in 1994, prohibits the use of force, threat of force, or physical obstruction to interfere with anyone “lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship.” Physical obstruction under this law means rendering entrance to or exit from a place of worship impassable or making passage unreasonably difficult or hazardous.

Violations can result in fines and imprisonment, with enhanced penalties for repeat offenses or incidents involving bodily injury. Churches and aggrieved individuals can also bring civil suits seeking injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. Additionally, 18 U.S.C. § 247 specifically addresses damage to religious property and obstruction of persons in the free exercise of religious beliefs.

What State Laws Apply?

Nearly every state has laws specifically criminalizing the disruption of religious services.

In Minnesota, the state where the latest incident occurred, Section 609.28 makes it a gross misdemeanor to “intentionally and physically [obstruct] any individual’s access to or egress from a religious establishment.”

In California, Penal Code 302 makes it a misdemeanor to intentionally disturb any assembly of people meeting for religious worship by “profane discourse, rude or indecent behavior, or by any unnecessary noise,” with penalties including up to one year in jail, a $1,000 fine, or both.

In Florida, Section 871.01 makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to “willfully and maliciously” interrupt or disturb any assembly of people met for worship; if the disruption includes a credible threat, it becomes a third-degree felony.

In Virginia, if the disruption “prevents or interferes with orderly conduct” or tends to cause violence, it’s classified as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Similarly, in Massachusetts, Chapter 272, Section 38 punishes anyone who “wilfully interrupts or disturbs” an assembly gathered for worship with up to one year imprisonment or a $1,000 fine, while in New York, Penal Law § 240.21 criminalizes disruption of religious services.

The common thread across these statutes is the word “willfully”—the law targets intentional, purposeful disruption, not accidental disturbances.

Is Asking Someone to Leave a Church a Violation of Religious Freedom?

No. Religious liberty protects a church’s right to govern its own worship according to its theological convictions. The First Amendment doesn’t require a church to provide a platform for messages contrary to its mission.

Read More