The Brief | The FACE Act Comes for the Left?
Plus: The DOJ investigation into Walz and Frey, 1,500 troops on standby, Iran's grim death toll, and the Greenland tariff blowup that has Europe seething.
The weekend was chaotic—not just in the news, but in life. If you were following my stories yesterday, you know my husband and I bought a 34-foot iron bridge, hauled it nearly two hours to our property, tied it to a tree, and dragged it off the trailer like absolute lunatics. Yes, it was exactly as insane as it sounds.
Full story in my IG stories, otherwise you have to wait till the Sunday Desk.
But not as insane as a mob of anti-ICE protesters storming a church in St. Paul to harass the pastor, chase out parishioners, and terrorize children. All in the middle of Sunday worship!
So. My weekend involved dragging industrial infrastructure through the woods. Theirs involved desecrating a house of God. We are not the same.
Let’s get into it.
When They Storm Churches, Who Gets Charged?
Here’s something you don’t see every day: the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is investigating left-wing protesters for potentially violating the federal FACE Act after they stormed Cities Church in St. Paul during Sunday worship services.
The anti-ICE mob descended on the church because one of its pastors, David Easterwood, reportedly also serves as the acting field office director for ICE in Minnesota. Video shows activists chanting “Justice for Renee Good” in the middle of the sanctuary while the lead pastor was speaking. Former CNN anchor Don Lemon was there livestreaming, naturally.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon didn’t mince words. “The @CivilRights is investigating the potential violations of the federal FACE Act by these people desecrating a house of worship and interfering with Christian worshippers,” she posted, adding that the FBI has been activated too.
Now, a brief history lesson: the FACE Act (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act) was originally used to prosecute pro-life activists who blocked abortion clinic entrances. The law also protects houses of worship. The irony of potentially wielding it against protesters who disrupted a Christian service—led in part by BLM activist Nekima Levy Armstrong, former president of the Minneapolis NAACP—is almost too rich.
Don Lemon tried lecturing the church’s lead pastor, Jonathan Parnell, about the First Amendment. Parnell shot back: “This is unacceptable. It’s shameful to see anyone interrupt a public gathering of Christians in worship.”
Remember when Tim Walz was morally outraged over the holidays, warning that ICE would target church services? “Because that’s who they are,” he said. One wonders if he’ll muster the same outrage now that his ideological allies are the ones storming sanctuaries.
The DOJ Puts Walz and Frey on Notice
Speaking of Walz, the Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation into both him and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey for allegedly conspiring to impede federal immigration agents.
CBS News reported that the probe stems from statements both men have made about the nearly 3,000 ICE and Border Patrol officers deployed to the Twin Cities region. Subpoenas are expected. The statute in question—18 U.S.C. § 372—makes it a crime for two or more people to conspire to prevent federal officers from doing their jobs through “force, intimidation, or threats.”
Frey called it “an obvious attempt to intimidate me.” Walz compared it to investigations of Jerome Powell and Elissa Slotkin, calling it “a dangerous, authoritarian tactic.”
To be clear: the bar for proving a conspiracy based on public criticism is high. First Amendment experts have noted there’s virtually no modern precedent for treating political rhetoric as obstruction. But this DOJ clearly isn’t playing the same game as the last one.
Here’s the context the investigation hinges on: Frey told CBS’s “Face the Nation” that the federal surge feels like an “occupying force” and said ICE should just “leave.” Walz has encouraged peaceful protests while refusing to cooperate with federal detainers. The feds say that posture—combined with the chaos on the ground—creates a situation where state and local leaders are actively undermining federal operations.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was even more direct: “Walz and Frey—I’m focused on stopping YOU from your terrorism by whatever means necessary. This is not a threat. It’s a promise.”
Whether or not this investigation goes anywhere legally, the message is unmistakable: the DOJ isn’t going to let Democratic officials wage a public relations war against immigration enforcement without pushback.
1,500 Troops on Standby
Meanwhile, Axios reports that the Pentagon has ordered 1,500 active-duty soldiers from the 11th Airborne Division to prepare for possible deployment to Minneapolis as President Trump considers invoking the Insurrection Act.
There’s no plan to send them yet. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said the “Department of War is always prepared to execute the orders of the Commander-in-Chief if called upon.” But the standby order signals that invoking the Insurrection Act—which hasn’t been used since the 1992 LA riots—is a live option.
Polls show public discomfort with ICE’s aggressive tactics. A CBS News–YouGov poll found 61% said ICE was being “too tough.” But the same polling also shows Americans split on whether state leaders should be cooperating more or less with federal enforcement.
The Minnesota National Guard is already mobilized at Walz’s direction, though not yet deployed to city streets. They’ve announced they’ll wear reflective vests if activated—so you can tell them apart from the federal officers who apparently aren’t going anywhere.
Trump’s Greenland Obsession Rattles Europe
On the international front, President Trump threatened 10% tariffs starting February 1 on France, Germany, the U.K., the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland—rising to 25% in June—until the U.S. reaches a deal to buy Greenland.
But it’s the letter to Norway that’s raising eyebrows across European capitals.
According to Politico, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre confirms that Trump sent a letter explicitly linking his Nobel Peace Prize snub to his Greenland ambitions. The letter reportedly reiterates threats against NATO allies over the Arctic territory. Perhaps more notable: PBS News reports that National Security Council staff forwarded the letter to several European ambassadors in Washington—a move that reads less like diplomacy and more like a warning shot.
The White House has yet to publicly confirm or respond to reports of the letter.
The response from Europe was immediate and furious. French President Macron called for deploying the EU’s “anti-coercion instrument”—a 2023 tool never before used that could restrict American companies’ access to the European market. European leaders from Sweden, Germany, Norway, and the Netherlands all used the same word to describe Trump’s move: “blackmail.”
European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen warned of a “downward spiral.” EU leaders convened an emergency meeting. European Council President António Costa announced an “extraordinary meeting” in the coming days, saying member states share a “readiness to defend ourselves against any form of coercion.” The EU–U.S. trade deal Trump once called the “biggest deal ever made” is now in jeopardy.
Here’s what frustrates me: there may be legitimate strategic reasons to want Greenland in the American sphere. China’s been sniffing around Arctic resources for years. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas made that point herself, noting that “China and Russia must be having a field day” watching the transatlantic fracture—and suggesting that if Greenland’s security is truly at risk, “we can address this inside NATO.”
But sending a petty letter to Norway dragging in a Nobel snub, then having the NSC blast it out to ambassadors? That’s not strategy. That’s grievance dressed up as foreign policy. Markets don’t like uncertainty, and this kind of chest-thumping creates exactly that. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent doubled down on Sunday, telling NBC that “Europeans project weakness” while the “U.S. projects strength.” Maybe. But alienating allies while trying to pressure them isn’t strength—it’s a gamble that the alliance will hold no matter what we throw at it.
Iran: 5,000 Dead and Counting
Iran’s government has publicly acknowledged at least 5,000 deaths in the ongoing unrest—including 500 security personnel, the Daily Wire reports. If they’re admitting that number, the real toll is almost certainly higher.
The protests began over economic hardship and swelled into calls to end clerical rule entirely. It’s the deadliest unrest since the 1979 Islamic revolution.
Meanwhile, hackers disrupted Iranian state television and aired a statement from exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi urging Iranians to continue resisting, according to the Jerusalem Post. A flash of defiance cutting through the regime’s information control, whether coordinated by Pahlavi himself or sympathizers, the symbolism matters.
The judiciary is hinting at executions. Supreme Leader Khamenei blamed “terrorists and rioters” linked to the U.S. and Israel. Trump, for his part, said it’s “time to look for new leadership in Iran.”
The path forward is unclear. But when a government admits to 5,000 deaths, you know the real number is the kind of figure they’re trying to bury.
Charlie Kirk Case: The Defense Gets Creative
Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old charged with murdering Charlie Kirk at a Utah campus event last September, is trying to disqualify the entire prosecution because a deputy county attorney’s child attended the event.
The child wasn’t a witness to the actual shooting. According to court filings, they “heard a loud sound, like a pop” and later texted “CHARLIE GOT SHOT” to a family group chat. But the defense argues that this personal connection creates a conflict of interest—and that the prosecution’s “rush” to seek the death penalty shows bias.
Prosecutors call it what it is: a stalling tactic. The Utah County Attorney said the child was “neither a material witness nor a victim” and that their secondhand knowledge is hearsay.
Jury selection hasn’t even started, and we’re already in procedural trench warfare. Robinson reportedly texted his partner that he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred.” If the evidence is as strong as prosecutors say, expect more creative delay tactics ahead.
Quick Rundown
María Corina Machado presented Trump with her Nobel Peace Prize medal. The Venezuelan opposition leader gave Trump the award “for the work I have done,” per the Guardian. It’s technically her medal from the 2024 prize, but the symbolism is clear.
A federal appeals court sided with the Trump administration in the Mahmoud Khalil case, ruling the lower court judge lacked authority to order the anti-Israel activist’s release.
China and Canada announced tariff relief after a high-stakes meeting between Prime Minister Carney and President Xi, per the BBC.
A man arrested in Minneapolis died in ICE custody in Texas. Victor Manuel Diaz was found unresponsive; ICE cited a “presumed suicide” but the cause remains under investigation.
NASA completed its first-ever medical evacuation from the ISS. Four astronauts landed safely, including one in “stable” condition, per the Guardian.
Let’s Talk
What’s sitting with you today? Is deploying the FACE Act against left-wing protesters a case of equal application of the law—or weaponization in reverse? And how long can this Minneapolis standoff go on before something truly breaks?
Hit me in the comments. I read every single one.
See you Wednesday.
Thank you for the Charlie Kirk update. A tidbit I have not seen anywhere else.
Enjoying “The Brief”! 😊