NJ Rep LaMonica McIver's immunity defense REJECTED by court after arrest for assaulting ICE officers at Delaney Hall

A federal appeals court has rejected Democratic Representative LaMonica McIver’s legislative immunity defense over her altercation with immigration officials at the Delaney Hall detention facility in New Jersey.

McIver is facing three federal charges stemming from an incident during a May 2025 visit to Delaney Hall, which she described as a congressional oversight investigation. The charges allege that McIver assaulted and impeded federal officers during her visit to the facility alongside other Democratic lawmakers.

McIver has argued that the prosecution is politically motivated and that she is protected from prosecution under the Constitution’s Free Speech Clause because she was engaged in legislative activity. However, a three-judge panel on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected that argument in a 2-1 ruling, finding that two of the three charged actions were “unanimously non-legislative.”

Judge Cindy Chung, a Biden appointee, wrote the majority opinion. “The Speech or Debate Clause does not provide a blanket protection over ‘all things in any way related to the legislative process,’” Chung wrote. “The nature of the conduct charged in Count One is non legislative. Congresswoman McIver’s physical contact with Victim-1 was not ‘integral’ to the ‘deliberative and communicative processes by which Members participate in committee and House proceedings.’”

The majority determined that the altercation occurred outside the immigration facility and did not constitute protected legislative activity. The panel sent the third charge back to the trial court for further consideration because the indictment’s allegations that McIver “forcibly” interfered with immigration officers did not specify enough details about where the conduct occurred or what actions she committed formed the basis of that charge.

In response to the ruling, McIver said she believed the appeals court had reached the wrong decision.

“I fundamentally believe that the court got it wrong here. To protect the people, their elected representatives must be authorized to conduct oversight of the executive branch without fear of retaliation,” she said, according to The Hill. “Today’s decision chills that authority and emboldens the Trump administration to continue persecuting our most vulnerable communities, those who try to defend them, and anyone who dares hold the president or his lackeys accountable.”