All articles tagged with #speech or debate clause
Jim Jordan urged a DOJ criminal referral against Jack Smith for allegedly lying to Congress about text-message content; Smith’s lawyers call the move dangerous and unprecedented, insisting his Dec. 17 testimony was truthful and that his team was seeking only metadata (dates/times), not message content, highlighting a heightened partisan clash over the DOJ’s handling of Trump-related investigations.
A 3rd Circuit panel wrestles with whether Rep. LaMonica McIver’s alleged assault of federal officers can be shielded by the Constitution’s speech-or-debate immunity and whether the Trump-era DOJ is pursuing the case as selective prosecution, signaling the tension between congressional immunity and accountability as a trial looms over the Newark incident outside Delaney Hall.
New Jersey Rep. LaMonica McIver plans to appeal a three‑count indictment over an incident outside a May ICE detention facility, arguing the Constitution’s speech or debate clause shields lawmakers from prosecution for acts tied to their official duties. The appeal to the 3rd Circuit could redefine the scope of congressional immunity after a judge previously declined to dismiss two counts, with prosecutors contesting the immunity argument.
Sen. Mark Kelly filed a federal lawsuit against the Pentagon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, alleging punitive actions tied to his participation in a Democratic video to U.S. troops violated the Constitution, including the Speech or Debate Clause and due‑process protections; the suit also names the Navy Department. The Pentagon has not commented on ongoing litigation, and Hegseth had announced a plan to cut Kelly’s retired pay amid the dispute.
Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly filed a civil lawsuit against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to block the Pentagon's move to downgrade his retirement rank and pay, arguing the punishment is unconstitutional retaliation for his criticisms of the administration and protected speech, including a video urging service members to refuse illegal orders.
A federal judge has ordered Republican Congressman Scott Perry to turn over nearly 1,700 records from his phone to special counsel prosecutors, potentially revealing his involvement in Donald Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. The judge's ruling allows prosecutors to access the majority of the records, which include discussions about influencing executive branch officials and state officials, as well as communications about the January 6 Capitol attack. The extent to which Perry's communications are protected by the speech or debate clause, which shields members of Congress from legal peril related to their official duties, is still being determined.
A federal judge has ordered Rep. Scott Perry, a Republican from Pennsylvania, to turn over nearly 1,700 cellphone records to government investigators in relation to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. The judge ruled that the records were not protected by the speech or debate clause of the Constitution. While some records were deemed protected, the remaining ones, including messages about alleged election fraud and the role of the vice president in certifying the electoral vote count, must be disclosed. Perry had previously argued that the clause protected him from the government searching his communications, but the court largely rejected that argument.
A federal judge's secret order requiring Mike Pence to testify about aspects of Donald Trump's bid to subvert the 2020 election was also an unprecedented ruling about the vice presidency itself. It is the first time in U.S. history that a federal judge has concluded that vice presidents are entitled to a form of immunity from prying investigators. Unlike presidents, who draw all their power from the executive branch, vice presidents get their immunity from Congress, Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg ruled.
A federal judge in Washington has ruled that former Vice President Mike Pence must testify before a grand jury about former President Donald Trump's effort to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. The judge rejected Trump's claims of executive privilege and found they did not apply to any potential testimony by Pence. However, the speech or debate clause in part protects Pence from providing testimony, specifically on congressional matters related to the events of Jan. 6, 2021, though he must testify about any illegal acts by Trump.