Protests inside churches are unusual despite long history of civil disobedience in the US

American religious history is rife with protest movements, yet disruptions inside houses of worship remain uncommon territory for political activism. This distinction underscores the significance of recent events at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, where anti-ICE protesters interrupted a Sunday service at a Southern Baptist congregation whose pastor works for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Federal authorities arrested three protesters on Thursday, including civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong, who had framed the action in religious terms on social media before her arrest: “It’s time for judgment to begin and it will begin in the House of God!!!”

Charles C. Haynes, a senior fellow for religious liberty at the Freedom Forum, points out that disrupting worship services violates the law—likely the protesters’ intent. “Absolutely, in my view, civil rights law should be invoked when people interfere with the religious freedom of others in their house of worship,” Haynes noted. He also acknowledged that protesters typically feel their cause demands immediate action.

The protest at Cities Church involved approximately three dozen people who entered during service, with some approaching the pulpit while others chanted “ICE out” and referenced Renee Good, who was fatally shot by an ICE officer in Minneapolis on January 7. The church’s pastor, David Easterwood, is employed by ICE.

Southern Baptist leadership quickly condemned the action. Kevin Ezell, president of the denomination’s North American Mission Board, stated, “No cause—political or otherwise—justifies the desecration of a sacred space or the intimidation and trauma inflicted on families gathered peacefully in the house of God.”

More typically, protests occur outside religious buildings, as seen in recent anti-Israel demonstrations near New York City synagogues or the infamous Westboro Baptist Church’s military funeral protests. Courts and legislators have worked to balance free speech rights with worshippers’ religious freedoms, often establishing buffer zones around houses of worship.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Westboro’s right to protest, though states subsequently enacted laws restricting when and where funeral protests could take place. New York is currently considering legislation creating 25-foot buffer zones from property lines of houses of worship following recent protests near synagogues.

Despite widespread criticism of ICE operations in Minnesota, the church protest has garnered limited support. Even clergy who oppose current immigration enforcement tactics expressed discomfort with the tactics. Brian Kaylor, a Cooperative Baptist Fellowship-affiliated minister and leader of Christian media organization Word&Way, described himself as “very torn” by the protest, warning that such tactics becoming widespread across the political spectrum would be “very alarming.”

The federal charges against the protesters stem from a law originally enacted after the Civil War to counter vigilante groups like the Ku Klux Klan. The statute has been revised and broadened since then to address various violations of constitutional rights. Penalties can be severe—up to 10 years in prison, or more if the offense involves injury, death, or property destruction.

While uncommon, disruptions of religious services have historical precedents. Radical Quakers in colonial America interrupted services of established churches they deemed illegitimate. The African Methodist Episcopal Church traces its origins to an 18th-century walkout by Black worshippers from a white church where they experienced discrimination. During the Civil Rights Movement, activists staged “kneel-ins” at segregated churches.

One of the most notable recent precedents occurred in 1989, when members of AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) disrupted Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, protesting what they viewed as inadequate responses to the AIDS crisis by both government and the Catholic Church. Protesters faced minor charges under state law.

“There was a lot of pushback,” Haynes said regarding the ACT UP protest. “But for ACT UP, it was life or death for them at the time.”

Religious congregations have strengthened security protocols in recent years following deadly attacks and growing safety concerns. Many faith leaders expressed dismay when the federal government announced last January that immigration agencies could make arrests in churches, schools, and hospitals, ending previous protections for sensitive locations.

The intersection of religious sanctity, free speech, and civil disobedience continues to challenge legal systems and community standards across the United States.