Democrat Rep. LaMonica McIver finally got a ruling on her motions to dismiss the charges tied to her alleged behavior at the ICE facility in Newark back on May 9.
McIver is facing three counts of assaulting, resisting, impeding, and interfering with a federal officer under 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1). She has pleaded not guilty — but the charges speak for themselves.
She filed two motions to dismiss — the first claiming she was shielded by legislative immunity under the Speech or Debate Clause.
But Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Jamel Semper wasn’t buying it. He rejected the argument outright, noting as to Counts One and Three that “lawfully or unlawfully, she actively engaged in conduct unrelated to her oversight responsibilities and congressional duties.”
The judge held off on ruling on Count Two, noting that more evidence needed to be reviewed — including video footage — and that he couldn’t issue a final decision until all the facts were in.
McIver’s second motion went even further, claiming she was the victim of selective enforcement, selective prosecution, and even vindictive prosecution. As a fallback, she asked for broad discovery in the event the court didn’t toss the charges outright.
Among the arguments McIver made was that January 6 defendants were a “similarly situated group against whom enforcement and prosecutorial action was not taken.” The argument was not well-received, to say the least. In contrast, the opinion noted that there had been significant investigatory actions regarding the Jan. 6 defendants, who were indeed prosecuted. Additionally, the facts were clearly distinct.
On the claim of vindictive prosecution, the judge found that McIver hadn’t come close to showing any personal animus. And honestly, the way the court reached that conclusion was almost comical:
In fact, during President Trump’s full exchange with a reporter where he stated the “days of woke are over,” when asked if he directed the prosecution of Defendant, the President stated “No. I didn’t. The days of woke are over. That woman, I don’t, I have no idea who she is.”
McIver argued the government was retaliating for her “lawful oversight activity” and that the “Executive Branch does not like scrutiny of its immigration policies and practices.” But in the judge’s ruling, this was an excellent point:
This argument is undermined by the absence of charges filed against the Representatives who were also present on May 9 conducting oversight of the administration’s immigration policies.
The judge also shut down her request for additional discovery on that claim.
It’s refreshing, frankly, to see a Biden-appointed judge apply some actual logic and common sense here. His background as a former federal prosecutor probably helps explain why he didn’t entertain McIver’s far-fetched arguments.
In a statement, McIver said she was “disappointed” in the ruling:
Today’s decision is disappointing. I am not in this fight only for myself, and I’m concerned that this decision will simply embolden the administration.
This case is not over. I am committed to protecting my community, our people, and our country. pic.twitter.com/MXYALC2als
— Rep. LaMonica McIver (@RepLaMonica) November 13, 2025
“I am not in this fight only for myself, and I am concerned that this decision will simply embolden the administration,” she said.
Her attorney, Paul Fishman, said McIver and her legal team are “evaluating next steps” in response to legal decisions they believe “are wrong.”
