hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Condemns a protest that disrupted a church service.
Rep. Carter (R-GA) and the Judiciary Committee.
Introduced, referred to committee, no vote yet.
The resolution condemns the January 18, 2026 disruption at Cities Church in St. Paul, MN, where protesters interfered with worship. It specifically names former CNN host Don Lemon for participating. The bill affirms religious freedom, cites the FACE Act as a potential legal basis, and commends the DOJ investigation. Rep. Carter introduced it; it's now with the House Judiciary Committee. 'In committee' means it hasn't reached the House floor for a vote.
Introduced Jan 30, 2026
This bill is under review by a committee. The committee holds hearings, gathers testimony from experts and stakeholders, and may propose amendments. If the committee votes to advance it, the bill moves to the full chamber for debate and a vote.
Passing this resolution would not create new laws, but it would put Congress on record against worship disruptions. It highlights the FACE Act, which already makes it a crime to obstruct religious services. This could lead to more DOJ resources for such cases and warn public figures against participating. The naming of Don Lemon may signal congressional intent to hold influential individuals accountable under existing law.
Supporters Say
Supporters say the resolution defends religious liberty and protects worshipers from intimidation and violence.
Critics Say
Critics argue the resolution targets a specific person and may chill protected protest activity outside worship services.
Supporters emphasize that entering a church during service to disrupt is not peaceful protest but illegal intimidation. They point to the FACE Act and the need to protect all faiths equally. Critics worry that condemning a specific individual, Don Lemon, could be seen as political retribution, and that the line between disruptive protest and lawful demonstration must be carefully drawn. Some also question whether the incident meets the legal threshold for FACE Act violations.