NJ Dem Accused of Assaulting ICE Agent Has to Stand Trial: Court

A New Jersey Democrat arrested last year on charges of assaulting a federal officer is learning that her status as a member of Congress is not a license to commit crimes.

A federal appeals court has handed prosecutors a significant victory in the criminal case against Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver, ruling that two of the three federal charges against her can move forward.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled 2-1 Wednesday that the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause does not protect McIver from prosecution for the specific physical conduct alleged in the case.

McIver was charged last June following a confrontation with federal officers outside the Delaney Hall immigration detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, on May 9, 2025.

The Speech or Debate Clause generally protects members of Congress from being questioned or prosecuted over legitimate legislative activities, including certain congressional investigations and oversight work.

The protection is intended to preserve the independence of Congress from interference by the executive and judicial branches.

McIver argued that she was at Delaney Hall as part of an authorized congressional oversight visit and that prosecuting her over the confrontation violated both the Speech or Debate Clause and constitutional separation-of-powers principles.

The appeals court’s majority rejected that argument as it applied to two of the charges.

Judge Cindy Chung, joined by Judge Stephanos Bibas, concluded that the specific physical actions alleged in Counts One and Two were “unambiguously non-legislative” and therefore fell outside the constitutional protection afforded to lawmakers.

Those counts accuse McIver of physically confronting federal officers during the chaotic encounter, including allegedly slamming her forearm into one officer and grabbing him.

Prosecutors also allege that McIver used her forearms to strike another officer while attempting to push past him.

The ruling does not determine whether McIver committed the alleged acts. Instead, it allows prosecutors to proceed with two charges and attempt to prove their allegations in court.

The appeals court did hand McIver a partial victory involving the third and broader charge against her.