Mall of America drops restitution demands for ‘Black Lives Matter’ protest

The Black Lives Matter group that protested at the Mall of America in December says mall officials are no longer seeking restitution for lost revenue  due to the protest.

Eleven protest leaders were arrested Dec. 20 for trespassing, and a section of the mall was shut down during the event. Previously, the mall had said it would seek restitution for the lost revenue from the protesters, but now won’t, the group said.

The Black Lives Matter Minneapolis group said in a statement today that the mall should work to persuade the Bloomington City Attorney to drop the criminal charges, too:

“Mall of America’s decision to not seek restitution is just a step in the right direction, we will keep the pressure on until all charges are dropped against all alleged organizers and arrestees from peaceful gathering on Dec. 20 at the Mall of America. Mall of America has considerable influence in the City of Bloomington and in Sandra Johnson’s office. This is an opportunity for the Mall of America to use their influence in the service of racial justice and equity by demanding Sandra Johnson drop all charges.”

The next court date for the protesters is May 1.

The Black Lives Matter group has called for a boycott of the mall until the charges are dropped.

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (6)

  1. Submitted by Dennis Tester on 04/15/2015 - 06:45 pm.

    Zero credibility

    This would be like MLK demanding to be let out of jail in Selma. I guess we’ve heard the last of Black Lives Matter as a credible voice for their causes, dubious as they were.

    • Submitted by Kurt Nelson on 04/15/2015 - 08:27 pm.

      I;m curious

      Are they dubious because they are black, or because, well, I have my answer.

      • Submitted by Dennis Tester on 04/16/2015 - 08:29 am.


        they’re dubious because they were being planned and organized by professional left-wing groups who do that sort of thing for a living.

  2. Submitted by Joe Musich on 04/15/2015 - 10:12 pm.

    well probably …

    Only because MoA has turned itself into a laughing stock. This entitity and and The City of Bloomington have lost any credibility representing anything in my mind excepted the self interest of certain individuals. Sort of the “damn the public, full speed ahead!” I would expect in the end all charges will be dropped. The bigger question is what will happen to the bigger question of black lives mattering. That should be the focus. And I am glad we can all return to settling that condition. And possibliy begin to dialogue on social and economic equality.

  3. Submitted by alan yelsey on 04/16/2015 - 10:21 am.

    Justice and Equality vs Mall of America

    First, the Mall of America has received millions of dollars in public subsidies even though it is a privately owned entity. We the public paid for a transit link to its doors, for highway improvements and for certain tax breaks. It is a public accommodation as defined by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and civil protest is one of the protected rights. There was no trespassing. When our local and state governments, including the Bloomington government, behave with injustice and sometimes violence against citizens, often citizens of color or those at lower income levels, the most precious principle is not the momentary disruption of a place of commerce but the expression of outrage and acknowledgement that discrimination of any kind, including the kind perpetrated by the bloomington city attorney and the Mall of America, is not acceptable, and must be opposed by everyone who believes in our constitution. We urge everyone to choose to shop away from the Mall of America and we urge everyone to protest discrimination and protect the people fighting against injustice in this nation. Black Lives Matter. Indigenous Lives Matter. Hispanic Lives Matter. Every Life Matters.

  4. Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 04/16/2015 - 03:04 pm.

    The reportage here left out a crucial element of the Mall of America’s decision not to seek remuneration for the costs of disrupted commerce by the protest. The Mall prefers to focus on its status as private property that was illegally used by a large mob of people for an unpermitted protest. Those charges about the illegality of the protest will not go away, nor should they.

    Also, it is my understanding that the protesters still face the prospect of having to repay the city of Bloomington for the expenses related to the police presence at the protest, which may, or may not, have turned into something not peaceful (no one could predict which).

    Again, all of us should make a real attempt to separate this specific, badly-thought-through protest event from the larger issue that Black Lives Matter wants to address. Many people want to correct the circumstances that needlessly and unfairly and illegally put black lives at risk, and stand in solidarity with those working toward that goal. This Mall of America stuff is small potatoes by comparison, and the few, well-targeted leaders should just face this particular music and move on.

Leave a Reply