The situation in Minnesota took a sharply escalated turn this week after far-left protesters stormed Cities Church in St. Paul during Sunday worship, and now, a sitting elected official is endorsing the tactic — and calling for more of it.
Minnesota State Representative Leigh Finke, a transgender Democrat and vocal progressive, issued a full-throated defense of the church disruption, invoking historical protest movements and demanding continued “nonviolent resistance” until Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is removed from the state entirely. The comments came in the wake of an already explosive incident in which Black Lives Matter activists, reportedly led by Nikema Armstrong, interrupted church services where the local ICE field office director also serves as a pastor.
Minnesota State Rep. Leigh Fink is calling on people to continue disrupting churches in Minnesota until ICE is out.https://t.co/VEEVYk5CNB pic.twitter.com/zRfXzE3Mk2
— JLR© (@JLRINVESTIGATES) January 19, 2026
The protest, which included chanting and shouting down the pastor mid-sermon, was live-streamed by former CNN host Don Lemon, who embedded with the protest group throughout the day. Parishioners, including children, were visibly alarmed during the demonstration, which some described as traumatic and intentionally provocative.
Now, with the Department of Justice confirming an ongoing investigation into whether the incident violated the FACE Act — a federal law protecting religious institutions from interference — attention has turned to Rep. Finke’s stunning public statement, which some legal experts say could be interpreted as incitement.
In her remarks, Finke compared the church disruption to a 1989 protest by AIDS activists at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, framing both as righteous acts of conscience against state-sanctioned oppression. She declared:
“Actions like this—nonviolent resistance in the face of government inaction or oppression—are essential. And they must continue until I.C.E. is out of our state, the administration is out of the White House, and dignity and humanity for all of our neighbors is achieved.”
This wasn’t a vague endorsement of protest — it was a direct call to replicate what many see as a criminal act.
Legal questions aside, the political implications are severe. On the same day the nation honored Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Finke drew comparisons between King’s legacy and the storming of a Christian church mid-worship. But King’s civil disobedience emphasized moral persuasion, not religious disruption. The backlash has already begun.
DOJ official Alina Habba confirmed Monday that investigators are reviewing the incident for potential FACE Act violations, saying:
“The FACE Act is a long-standing federal statute that prohibits force, threats, obstruction, any kind of interference with a religious place of worship. And it carries criminal penalties and violations.”
That investigation now must also contend with Finke’s remarks. Her position as a sitting state lawmaker makes her statements more consequential — and potentially more legally risky.
If charges are brought against the protesters, Finke’s statement will almost certainly be examined for its role in encouraging future disruptions. Whether she crossed a legal line is for courts to decide. But there is no ambiguity in the message she delivered: she believes churches are valid targets for protest so long as ICE exists in the state of Minnesota.
