What Multiple ICE Protests at Churches Tell Us About the Current Threat Environment

Recent incidents indicate a shift in how protest activity is being directed toward houses of worship.

Churches Are Now Being Targeted for Protest Activity

The invasion of Cities Church in Saint Paul was not an isolated event.

In the days that followed, two additional protest incidents occurred at houses of worship in different parts of the country. One took place inside a Jewish synagogue on Long Island. Another occurred outside Harvest Riverside Church in Southern California. All three incidents involved anti ICE protestors. All three involved disruption of religious gatherings.

Taken together, these events show a clear shift. Churches and synagogues are no longer being treated as spaces to be avoided. They are now being treated as legitimate venues for protest and pressure.

Two Follow On Incidents

On Long Island, protestors entered a Jewish temple during a speaking event involving Representative Tom Suozzi. The disruption occurred inside the sanctuary while the event was underway. Protestors used obscene and aggressive language, mocked the speaker, and disrupted the gathering before being removed. The protest was tied to opposition to ICE funding and immigration enforcement.

In Southern California, anti ICE protestors targeted Harvest Riverside Church during a Christian gathering associated with the “Make Heaven Crowded” campaign. Protestors positioned themselves outside church gates and remained in place as congregants entered and exited the property. Hostile language was directed at worshippers rather than church leadership. Families, elderly congregants, and regular churchgoers were confronted as they left a worship service.

These incidents occurred within days of the Cities Church invasion.

What These Incidents Show

These events are not identical, but they are related.

In Saint Paul and on Long Island, protestors entered houses of worship and disrupted events from inside. At Harvest Riverside, protestors remained outside but deliberately positioned themselves where congregants would have to pass them. This shows flexibility in approach, not restraint.

In all three cases, protest activity was directed at worshippers, not government officials. The justification was not an official church policy or endorsement. It was perceived association. Employment, attendance, or hosting a Christian event with any connection, real or assumed, to immigration policy was treated as sufficient cause.

That matters for churches. The threshold for being targeted is now very low.

Coordination and Government Involvement

What raises additional concern is the level of coordination that has been documented.

Reporting out of Minneapolis shows that Signal groups used to organize protest activity included administrators who were government employees, including the Lieutenant Governor of Minnesota. The Wright Report further documents that a senior deputy district attorney from Hennepin County took part in leading the protest inside Cities Church.

Claims that these Signal groups were operated out of emergency operations centers remain unverified and should be treated cautiously. However, the documented participation of senior government officials in a protest that disrupted a church is not speculative.

When government actors participate in or legitimize disruptions of worship, even if claimed to be in a personal capacity, it sends a signal. Churches are no longer viewed as neutral ground. They are viewed as acceptable pressure points

Rhetoric and Escalation

Language from public officials also plays a role in shaping behavior.

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz publicly described the current moment as a “John Brown / Fort Sumter moment.” Those references are not abstract. They point directly to violent insurrection and the outbreak of the Civil War. When a sitting governor uses language associated with armed conflict to describe political disputes, it lowers inhibitions.

That kind of rhetoric does not remain theoretical. Pressure that cannot be applied directly to federal institutions often moves toward softer targets. Increasingly, that pressure is landing on churches.

Churches did not create this environment, but they are being pulled into it.

What Churches Should Understand Right Now

This article is not about tactics or response procedures. That guidance is coming later this week.

For now, churches need to recognize that the threat environment has changed. Hosting Christian events, inviting speakers, or simply having congregants who work in law enforcement or government roles is now enough to draw attention from protest groups.

The response is not panic. The response is awareness, unity, and preparation.

Biblical Guidance for This Moment

Scripture is clear that God’s people should not be surprised when opposition becomes visible.

Nehemiah 4:9 (ESV)
“And we prayed to our God and set a guard as a protection against them day and night.”

Prayer and preparation occurred together.

Nehemiah 4:16 to 18 (ESV)
“From that day on, half of my servants worked on construction, and half held the spears, shields, bows, and coats of mail…”

God’s people did not abandon their work. They adjusted how they carried it out.

Matthew 10:16 (ESV)
“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”

Wisdom and innocence are not in conflict. They are commanded together.

The early church did not retreat when hostility became open. They stood firm, remained faithful, and ordered their lives accordingly.

Later this week, I will publish a standard operating procedure to help churches respond lawfully, calmly, and deliberately to protest activity. This article is meant to help churches understand the moment we are in.