U.S. District Judge Jamel Semper has ruled that federal prosecutors may move forward with their case against New Jersey Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver, who faces several charges related to a May incident at the Delaney Hall immigrant detention facility in Newark. During what was described as a congressional oversight visit, McIver was accused of pushing and striking an ICE officer. She sought to have the charges dismissed, arguing that her actions were constitutionally protected as part of her legislative duties. Judge Semper rejected most of that argument, concluding that much of her behavior fell outside the scope of legislative immunity, though he acknowledged that one charge overlapped with protections under the Speech or Debate Clause. He also dismissed her claim that the prosecution was politically motivated or driven by bias from the Trump administration.
The charges stem from an encounter that prosecutors say was captured on video and shows McIver forcibly impeding a federal officer. McIver pleaded not guilty, with her defense team maintaining that her conduct was part of legitimate oversight activity and that the allegations were exaggerated for political effect. Nevertheless, prosecutors charged her with several counts that could carry a combined sentence of up to 17 years if she is convicted. Judge Semper determined that the evidence presented thus far was sufficient to continue the case, ensuring that both legal arguments and political tensions surrounding the incident will remain in the spotlight.
The situation became more complicated when the Department of Homeland Security issued several public statements—both on X and in an official press release—criticizing McIver and other Democratic lawmakers who visited Delaney Hall. DHS characterized their visit as reckless and politically staged, claiming that members endangered officers and detainees and insisting that lawmakers “are not above the law.” Some posts described the facility’s population as the “worst of the worst,” framing the lawmakers’ behavior as irresponsible.
In response, McIver’s legal team asked the court to restrict DHS from making further extrajudicial statements, arguing that the posts were prejudicial and threatened her right to a fair trial by presenting her as guilty before legal proceedings had concluded. They cited nine examples they believed crossed ethical boundaries. Judge Semper agreed that some DHS statements were inappropriate, underscoring concerns about government commentary influencing public perception during an ongoing criminal case.
