Posted on 05/20/2026 11:26:23 PM PDT by Morgana
Louisiana has passed two laws aimed at stopping people from disrupting church services, months after protesters made national headlines by disrupting a Minnesota church service in opposition to one of its pastors serving as a federal immigration enforcement agent.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry signed House Bill 294, which helps empower churches to remove trespassers from their property, and House Bill 68, which expands the legal definition of disturbing the peace to include disrupting worship services.
HB 294 states that any religious leader, security team member "or person who is lawfully on the premises of a church or other place of worship" can request a trespasser or disruptive individual to leave the premises. If those requests are not granted, the law gives people lawfully present at the facility the right to use "reasonable and apparently necessary force" to remove the trespasser from the property.
“In Louisiana, we are committed to maintaining the right to worship without interference, and we remain steadfast in our commitment to safeguarding religious liberty,” Landry said in a statement Monday. “With the signing of these two bills, those protections just became stronger.”
Democratic Rep. Edmond Jordan was among the critics of HB 294, telling the bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Gabe Firment, earlier this year that he believed the bill could be used to advance discrimination.
“If somebody of the opposite race comes into the church and a member of the church is offended by that, and says that they are trespassing — they’re not being disruptive — but they determine that they’re trespassing and they ask them to leave, now they’re just there to worship, you don’t see your bill opening that up?” Jordan asked Firment.
Firment dismissed such situations as “far-fetched scenarios." Jordan replied that “your bill goes about disruption and it also speaks of trespassing,” noting that it “goes beyond disruption.”
“Let’s not cloak this under the disruption part, because it’s greater than that,” Jordan added. “When we make these laws, we have to take into consideration all of those scenarios.”
In January, protesters entered Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, disrupting a worship service because one of the pastors worked for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The large group of protesters interrupted the sermon with loud declarations, including chants of “ICE Out!” and “Stand up, fight back!” Some congregants said they felt personally threatened.
More than 30 people have been indicted for their alleged involvement in the incident, including former CNN anchor Don Lemon and independent reporter Georgia Fort.
The protest also sparked a civil lawsuit filed by a Cities Church member in U.S. District Court for Minnesota, accusing protesters of civil conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, aiding and abetting, trespassing and interference with religious exercise.
In response to the Cities Church incident, some states have considered legislation that would toughen penalties for those who disrupt worship services.
For example, in late February, the Alabama House of Representatives passed House Bill 363, which would make it a felony to disrupt a church service. The measure has been sent to the state Senate for further consideration.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Or has that incident in MN been permanently "memory-holed?"
Regards,
Louisiana needed to pass a law to address THIS?
Whatever happened to just ‘Get ‘em outta here!’??
It’ probably mostly to reinforce legal protections for those who act as “bouncer”.
A lot of church security have folks cc’ng these days but I can see it getting bad enough some may want security carrying AR’s for precision capabilities.
Re “… Whatever happened to just ‘Get ‘em outta here!’??…”
Lawyers happened. Lawfare happened.
And lack of testosterone and backbone happened.
The people that do this crap wouldn’t have dared to try it with the WWII generation men - they’d have been beaten to a pulp or worse.
Churches have to be empowered to enforce their rights and the law? Since when?
We had interrupters at our church in CA a couple times. When we “love bombed” them, they realized their efforts were futile they just left on their own.
My non-denominational church in MS has armed security - not that we need it down here on the coast - and, even tough we’re not supposed to, many members also carry their weapons to services.
Firment dismissed such situations as “far-fetched scenarios." Jordan replied that “your bill goes about disruption and it also speaks of trespassing,” noting that it “goes beyond disruption.”
“Let’s not cloak this under the disruption part, because it’s greater than that,” Jordan added. “When we make these laws, we have to take into consideration all of those scenarios.”
Another Democrat making up BS....
Don't worry, Pam Bondi is on that... oh, wait...
Why isnt the “safe act” or whatever biden called it being used to arrest those folks? They sure rushed to arrest abortuon protestors simply for praying or preaching outside abortion/murder clinics
The leftist “protestors” in MN were far more than disruptive. They were threatening, so much so that church members were effectively held hostage and unable to reach their children.
This should be 50 year sentences for terrorism.
Don't forget activist left-wing "judges".
Re judges:
Technically, wouldn’t they be considered under “lawyers“? IOW, do you have to be a lawyer first before you can become a judge? Just asking because I really don’t know.
Yeah, I thought about that after I posted it.
We just had a primary election here and there were a couple of ELECTIONS for judges, so maybe they don’t have to be lawyers. I don’t know either.
I looked around using DuckDuckGo a bit but found no answer, but I would think that an ELECTED judge would not have to be a lawyer, though I’m sure most are. It may depend on the location.
I think it would make sense to have a background in law and a deeper knowledge of the law of your state if you’re going to be a judge, elected, or appointed.
I think it’s like George Carlin‘s old saying… It’s a big club and we ain’t in it (paraphrased)
I am confused as to why this law would be needed.
AFAIK this was always the case. The meeting may be a open one but once you act in a disruptive manner you will be asked to stop or leave. If you refuse you can be removed by as much force as necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.