A federal judge has ordered an unusual review of grand jury materials tied to the indictment of several media figures in a case stemming from a January protest in Minnesota.
Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko in a rare move ordered the Department of Justice to turn over testimony and evidence presented to a grand jury in the conspiracy case against former CNN anchor Don Lemon and dozens of other people accused of disrupting a church service during the protest, CNN reported Wednesday.
"They say they were covering the protests as journalists, which Don is now," said CNN's Kate Bolduan. "This new order, described as extraordinary, compels the Justice Department to provide the judge with the presentations DOJ made to the grand jury in January and February that resulted in Lemon's indictment."
According to the order, the materials must include any introduction, legal instructions on the two counts, witness testimony, closing arguments, and answers to grand jurors' questions.
CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson argued the order reflects broader unease among judges about whether the Justice Department under President Donald Trump is operating independently of the White House, pointing to cases involving James Comey and Letitia James as context fueling that scrutiny.
He explained that grand jury proceedings are normally shielded from outside review, with prosecutors alone controlling what evidence and legal instructions jurors receive, since defense attorneys and defendants are barred from the room.
Jackson noted the review does not mean the case will be dismissed, but said the stakes are significant. If the judge determines that DOJ improperly manipulated the grand jury process, the case could collapse entirely, he said, citing a similar dismissal in Chicago involving anti-ICE protesters after a U.S. attorney apologized for prosecutorial misconduct there.
Jackson also highlighted that the DOJ reportedly sought search and arrest warrants from two separate magistrates who denied the requests before prosecutors turned to the grand jury instead, which he said seemingly raised the judge's suspicions.
"The judge is saying, 'Hey, you went to a magistrate to get this actual to get a search warrant and to get an arrest warrant, and you went to two different ones and they said no, and then you, DOJ, bypassed that and you went to the grand jury,'" Jackson said. "'There might be something here I better look,' and that's what this judge is doing, saying, 'I want to look under the hood.'"
"I think that's the right call for justice," Jackson added.
Jackson emphasized that a grand jury indictment requires only a finding of probable cause, not guilt, and that a quorum of 16 out of 23 jurors is needed, with 12 votes required to indict. Because DOJ has sole control over evidence and instructions presented in that setting, he said, judicial oversight in cases like this exists specifically to ensure the process wasn't manipulated for political ends.
- YouTube youtu.be
