The legal battle surrounding Don Lemon‘s indictment reached a critical turning point on Friday, as the former CNN journalist officially entered a plea of not guilty. During the arraignment in St. Paul, Minnesota, Lemon and his legal team took a defiant stand against his indictment, arguing that the federal charges are a political attempt to criminalize independent journalism. The case stems from a January 18 anti-ICE protest at Cities Church, an event Lemon insists he was attending solely as a reporter to document.

Source: Stephen Maturen / Getty

According to new legal documents obtained by TMZ, Lemon’s defense team is now demanding access to the confidential transcripts of the grand jury proceedings that led to Don Lemon’s indictment. They believe the government likely misrepresented key issues to the jury, particularly since two separate judges had previously reviewed the case and rejected the DOJ’s initial requests for arrest warrants due to a lack of evidence. Lemon has compared the federal government’s persistence to the tactics of authoritarian regimes, stating in the filings that the government “sold this unconstitutional mess” to the grand jury in a manner more consistent with Russia, China, or Iran than the United States.

The charges against Lemon and eight co-defendants involve conspiracy to violate constitutional rights and a felony violation of the FACE Act, which protects places of worship from physical obstruction. Federal prosecutors allege that Lemon was not just a bystander but a collaborator who helped maintain operational secrecy during a coordinated takeover of the church. However, Don Lemon’s indictment has faced heavy scrutiny from press freedom groups, who argue that holding doors or interviewing congregants does not constitute a physical obstruction. Outside the courthouse on Friday, dozens of protesters gathered to chant “Protect the press,” echoing Lemon’s sentiment that his 30-year career has always been anchored in the First Amendment.

The aggressive nature of the arrest has also become a focal point of the defense, with Lemon revealing on Jimmy Kimmel Live! that federal agents ignored his offer to turn himself in. Instead, nearly a dozen agents intercepted him in a Beverly Hills hotel lobby on January 29, an act Lemon describes as “revenge theater” designed to intimidate the media. While Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko has allowed Lemon to remain free on bond, the government still holds his phone, claiming it remains under a sealed search warrant. As the proceedings move forward, the legal community is watching closely to see if Don Lemon’s indictment will serve as a precedent-setting test of whether a journalist’s presence at a protest can be reframed as criminal conspiracy.

Furthermore, the seizure of Lemon’s cellular device has introduced a chilling precedent for reporters nationwide, as his legal team argues that the government’s continued possession of the phone constitutes a “back-door search” of 30 years’ worth of confidential sources and investigative notes. Defense attorneys have expressed grave concerns that federal agents are sifting through unrelated sensitive materials under the guise of the January 18 investigation, effectively turning the criminal process into an act of institutional surveillance. By holding his primary tool of trade, the government is not just targeting one individual but is signaling to all independent journalists that documenting state-related protests carries the risk of total professional risk.