A federal appeals court has rejected a New Jersey congresswoman’s attempt to dismiss assault charges against her, ruling that physical confrontation with immigration officers falls outside the scope of legislative immunity protections guaranteed by the Constitution.
Biden and Trump Appointees Unite on Ruling
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a 2-1 decision against Representative LaMonica McIver, a Democrat from New Jersey, who faces three criminal counts stemming from a May 2025 incident at Newark’s Delaney Hall detention center. Judges Cindy Chung, appointed by President Biden, and Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee, agreed that McIver’s actions during the confrontation did not qualify as official congressional duties deserving immunity from prosecution. The Department of Justice charged McIver with assaulting and impeding federal officers during an unannounced visit that descended into chaos and resulted in the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka.
According to court documents, McIver allegedly used her forearm to strike a federal officer attempting to arrest Baraka. The appellate judges determined that her intervention in the mayor’s arrest had no constitutional connection to any legislative function. A second count alleges McIver struck an officer with both forearms while returning to a secured area of the facility.
Constitutional Limits on Legislative Immunity
The two-judge majority wrote plainly that pushing past and forcibly striking someone represents unambiguously non-legislative conduct. Such physical acts, they concluded, are not integral to the legislative process and therefore receive no protection under congressional immunity provisions. The judges allowed two counts to proceed while sending a third charge back to a lower court for additional review. McIver’s legal team had argued the charges were vindictive and unfairly targeted their client for performing her oversight responsibilities.
Judge Thomas Ambro dissented from the majority opinion, arguing that executive branch officials preventing a member of Congress from entering a Department of Homeland Security facility effectively denies that legislator access to necessary oversight inspections. His position suggests broader immunity protections for congressional oversight activities.
Lawmaker Vows to Continue Fighting
McIver issued a defiant statement declaring the court got it wrong. She characterized the decision as chilling congressional authority and emboldening the Trump administration to persecute vulnerable communities and those who defend them. The congresswoman promised to explore every available option and vowed not to fold to administration pressure. The case originated from Democratic lawmakers’ concerns about alleged inhumane conditions and hunger strikes at the detention facility, claims Republicans have rejected as false narratives about Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations and detainee treatment standards.
