One of the defining images of 2020 featured two homeowners, two firearms and a confrontation that ignited a national firestorm.
Six years later, the legal, political and cultural fallout from that moment continues to reverberate through debates over self-defense, private property rights, public protest and prosecutorial power.
On June 28, 2020, as racial justice protests swept cities across America following the death of George Floyd, Black Lives Matter demonstrators made their way through Portland Place, a private, gated street in St. Louis, toward the home of then-Mayor Lyda Krewson.
As the crowd passed through the neighborhood, the McCloskeys emerged from their home carrying firearms — Mark with an AR-15-style rifle and Patricia with a handgun.
Within hours, images of the encounter had spread nationwide, turning a confrontation on a private St. Louis street into a flashpoint in America’s debate over self-defense, property rights and public protest.
Supporters viewed the couple as homeowners defending their property during a period of unrest that had swept cities across the country.
Critics argued they unnecessarily escalated the situation by brandishing firearms at demonstrators.
Six years later, the legal and political aftershocks of that day are still being felt.
Looking back today, Mark McCloskey said the experience reinforced one lesson above all else.
“You can’t rely on others,” McCloskey told Fox News Digital. “You have to be prepared. You have to know how to defend yourself.”
One of the latest developments came in 2025, when he announced that his AR-15 had finally been returned after what he described as three lawsuits, two trips to the Missouri Court of Appeals and more than 1,800 days of litigation.
“It only took three lawsuits, two trips to the Court of Appeals and 1,847 days, but I got my AR15 back!” McCloskey wrote on social media after recovering the rifle.
Looking back, McCloskey said the years-long legal battle reinforced the value of perseverance.
“It teaches the benefit of perseverance,” he said. “It took me 1,847 days, three lawsuits and two trips to the Court of Appeals to get my rifle back and then another 60 days or so to get that pistol back.”
He said the ordeal also took a significant toll on the couple’s law practice.
“Our business was relatively destroyed,” McCloskey said.
“If you Googled the McCloskey Law Center for two years after that event or longer, it said ‘permanently closed.’ If you Google my name right now it still says Mark McCloskey is a former personal injury lawyer. Nobody told me I retired.”
The legal battle over the firearms was only the latest chapter in a saga that quickly expanded far beyond the confrontation itself.
Then-St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner charged the couple with unlawful use of a weapon, triggering a closely watched legal fight that drew national attention.
Then-Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt criticized the prosecution and sought to intervene, arguing the case raised broader questions about Missourians’ rights to defend themselves and their property.
Looking back six years later, Schmitt, now a Missouri senator, said the case reflected what he believes was a broader trend among progressive prosecutors during that period.
“As rioters razed St. Louis, activist prosecutors like Kim Gardner chose to go after law-abiding citizens like the McCloskeys—not the looters and criminals destroying our cities,” Schmitt told Fox News Digital.
“Unfortunately, the McCloskey case became the rule, not the exception,” he said.
“As violent crimes skyrocketed, progressive prosecutors like Gardner targeted conservatives in an obvious attempt to beef up liberal bona fides and advance partisan agendas instead of upholding the letter of the law.”
Fox News Digital reached out to Gardner’s attorney.
As attorney general, Schmitt said his office intervened because it viewed the case as an example of “the justice system being weaponized against law-abiding Missourians.”
“In the Senate, I’m fighting to undo the damage caused by the Left’s crusade against our justice system and punish violent criminals, not innocent Americans,” he said.
The McCloskeys ultimately pleaded guilty to misdemeanor offenses in 2021 as part of a resolution to the case. Shortly afterward, they received pardons from then-Missouri Gov. Mike Parson.
In another significant development, a Missouri appeals court later affirmed the expungement of the couple’s convictions. Under Missouri law, the expungement effectively treats those convictions as though they never occurred.
Attorney Al Watkins, who represented the McCloskeys during the early stages of the controversy, said one of the biggest misconceptions about the case is what triggered the confrontation in the first place.
“The precipitating event was not the protest,” Watkins told Fox News Digital.
“It was the decision by local powers that be to mandate that local law enforcement be strictly ‘hands off’ protesters, regardless of their acts.”
Looking back, Watkins said the case offers lessons for lawyers and prosecutors facing intense public and political pressure.
“Do not be afraid to ignore political pressure,” he said. “Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey were immediately, incorrectly and unfairly labeled as racially motivated members of a privileged class.”
Watkins noted that the couple had chosen decades earlier to purchase and restore a home in the city and raise their family in a diverse St. Louis neighborhood.
As for the national reaction that followed, Watkins said he was not surprised by the intensity of the public response.
“The national reaction was an unsurprising and natural progression of the then-burgeoning divisiveness in our nation,” he said.
The events of June 2020 also reshaped the course of Mark McCloskey’s public life.
In the years that followed, the St. Louis attorney became an increasingly visible figure in conservative politics, speaking at the 2020 Republican National Convention and launching a bid for the US Senate in Missouri in 2022.
More recently, he has represented some defendants charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and advocated for compensation for those prosecuted after the attack, according to reporting by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
Earlier this year, McCloskey briefly stepped away from representing hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants before returning after the Justice Department announced plans for what it called an “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” which supporters say could compensate individuals they believe were unfairly prosecuted.
According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, McCloskey said he had initially stepped back because of a serious medical diagnosis, describing his condition as an “incurable, always-fatal disease,” though he declined to identify it publicly.
Yet despite his later involvement in politics, McCloskey remains most closely associated with the confrontation that unfolded outside his home in June 2020.
What began as a tense encounter on a private St. Louis street evolved into a legal battle, a political flashpoint and a national conversation that continues nearly six years later.
Despite the lingering fallout, McCloskey said the experience ultimately gave him and his wife a platform they never expected.
“It has given us a voice that we would not otherwise have,” he said. “I still speak around the country on constitutional rights in the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.”
For his part, Watkins said he hopes the couple can finally move beyond the controversy.
“I am hopeful they can live out their lives without again being demonized, victimized or prosecuted for protecting their American dream,” he said.
While he said he and Patricia continue to receive occasional death threats and hate mail, McCloskey said they remain committed to speaking publicly about the constitutional issues they believe the case represents.
“Some lingering negatives,” he said. “But overall, once again, it has given us an opportunity to spread the word.”
Read the full article here
