She came to the detention facility to examine the conditions for the detainees inside — not to end up with the threat of years behind bars herself.
One year and three federal charges later, the life of 39-year-old Rep. LaMonica McIver (D., N.J.) — a defendant in a legal battle that could redefine how members of Congress do their jobs — would be unrecognizable to the woman who showed up at a federal migrant detention facility in her district on the afternoon of May 9, 2025.
On Tuesday, McIver, along with two colleagues who joined her at the facility that day, plans to introduce a bill to strengthen oversight protections for members of Congress scrutinizing the Trump administration’s immigration tactics, as her own legal battle is about to escalate.
McIver was charged with three counts of assaulting, resisting, impeding and interfering with federal officers during a clash outside the New Jersey facility last spring. McIver denies wrongdoing and says the charges are politically motivated. A federal appeals court is expected to hear arguments in June on her bid to have those charges dismissed before trial. A district judge overseeing that case already ruled against her. McIver could face up to 17 years in prison.
The bill from McIver and Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman and Robert Menendez Jr., both New Jersey Democrats, is unlikely to pass in a Republican-controlled House. But the lawmakers are seeking to mark the anniversary of the episode and refocus attention on ways the Trump administration has made it more challenging for lawmakers to conduct visits to assess the conditions at detention facilities as it has waged an aggressive immigration crackdown.
On Friday, a federal appeals court rejected a Trump administration attempt to bar members of Congress from conducting unannounced oversight visits at immigration detention facilities. The ruling emerged from a lawsuit brought by congressional Democrats and upheld an earlier decision from a U.S. district court that overturned policies the Department of Homeland Security attempted to implement last year.
“The main point of this bill, you know, is to make sure that the Trump administration is adhering to Congress’s ability to have oversight,” McIver said.
The bill is “an attempt to raise the issue, to close some of the loopholes, to hold the contractors accountable and to hold this administration accountable,” Watson Coleman said. “And if we can’t get it through the system, at least we get to raise it on our various platforms.”
The lawmakers’ bill would reaffirm language in a 2019 appropriations law that effectively requires immigration detention centers to grant entry to members of Congress who are conducting oversight.
But McIver’s legislation goes further. The bill would require the homeland security secretary and any entity that contracts with DHS to grant members of Congress immediate access to immigration detention facilities for oversight visits. The legislation would mandate that facilities train their employees accordingly, and that DHS sever its contract with any entity that does not certify its personnel have that training.
In a statement, DHS called the bill “completely unnecessary,” arguing the department already complies with congressional oversight, and said the department needs to ensure “adequate agency support” for oversight visits. “These requests must be part of legitimate congressional oversight activities, and far too often they are just for a media act. Without proper support, such visits threaten the safety of ICE personnel, the detainees, and Members of Congress alike,” DHS said.
The bill’s chances of House passage could increase dramatically if Democrats regain control of the chamber after the November election.
According to court documents and interviews with the three representatives, when they arrived for an unannounced visit to check out the prison in McIver’s district that had newly reopened as a detention facility, they identified themselves and walked in through an entry gate. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka arrived about a half-hour later. He waited nearly an hour to be cleared for entry. Then, the mayor was asked to leave. Eventually, about a dozen federal agents approached Baraka with handcuffs and tried to arrest him. A crowd of protesters, the three Congress members and their staff gathered around Baraka.
In a 68-second encounter outside the facility, the Justice Department alleges McIver struck one federal agent with a forearm, and “slammed” her arm into and “reached out and tried to restrain” another. McIver wrapped her arm around Baraka and said repeatedly, “Don’t touch us,” video shows. During the ensuing scuffle, McIver and federal agents made physical contact multiple times. No one was injured. After the commotion, members, including McIver, were invited to tour the facility.
Federal prosecutors said they would bring a misdemeanor trespassing case against Baraka to trial. Later, interim New Jersey U.S. attorney Alina Habba said she was dropping the charge against Baraka and announced the charges against McIver.
On June 23, three judges on the appeals court will consider whether to dismiss the charges. An appeal from there would send the case to the Supreme Court, which would decide whether to take it up.
McIver’s attorneys argue that the charges are politically motivated and that the legal principle of legislative immunity protects lawmakers from being sued or prosecuted for actions they take as part of their official duties. Her attorneys claim the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which has been traditionally interpreted to support the concept of legislative immunity, protects her actions at the facility because she was acting in an official capacity. If the courts decide against McIver, the case could upend modern understandings of protected legislative work and restrict how members conduct oversight.
“I, of course, am of the view that everything that happened that day and what we were there to do was squarely within our right and role as members of Congress. But it hasn’t stopped the administration from bringing an action against her,” Menendez said.
McIver and her colleagues said that Congress should reassert its constitutional role as a check on the executive branch and that their bill should draw bipartisan support.
“This is about [Republicans’] right to have oversight as well,” McIver said. “Donald Trump will not be the president forever. … Republicans should be concerned about their ability to do their job on behalf of their constituents who have elected them.”
The past year has been stressful, McIver said. It feels like it’s been a week, not a year, since she first entered that gate at the detention facility. Her life has become a juggling act: working with lawyers, raising money to fund her legal defense, taking care of her daughter — and keeping up with the responsibilities of Congress. She’s always worried about her family.
“It’s been tough,” Watson Coleman said. “I admire the fact that she’s gone through this with such strength and conviction and continues to do her job. But it angers me that she has to go through what I think is an unlawful prosecution.”
The three lawmakers knew each other well enough before this all happened. Now, they talk frequently in a group chat. Watson Coleman sits with McIver on the House floor. Sometimes, she texts McIver just to check in.
Next month, McIver will turn 40. Three days later, she will sit in a courthouse in Wilmington, Delaware. Then, she will find out whether what happens next will come down to the opinions of nine justices, yards away from her congressional office.
McIver thinks a lot about the people fighting the Trump administration. She thinks of everyone who came before her who made it possible for her to serve in Congress.
“I think to myself, who are we to really get weary in this moment?” McIver said. “ … We have to continue to keep on.”
