Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Department of Justice said on Wednesday that it is moving to drop police reform agreements, known as consent decrees, that the Biden-era department reached with the cities of Louisville, Kentucky, and Minneapolis. The court-enforceable agreements were born out of probes launched after the 2020 police killings of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd.

The agreements with Minneapolis and Louisville, which were intended to address allegations of systemic unconstitutional policing and civil rights violations, were both held up in federal court and have faced several delays, with the DOJ requesting various extensions to file documents requested by the federal judges in each case.

Amid the delays, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara told ABC News in a February interview that while the Trump administration could intervene in the process, since the agreements have already been filed in federal court, whether they are ultimately approved is not up to the White House, but “ultimately in the federal judge’s hands.”

Officials in Minneapolis and Louisville told ABC News in February that the cities are still committed to the reforms outlined in the agreements and plan to implement changes with or without the support of the Trump administration.

The consent decrees each lay out a roadmap for police reform to rectify civil rights violations that the DOJ uncovered and, if approved by a federal judge, the court will appoint an independent monitor to oversee the implementation of the reforms and actions outlined in the agreement.

Kevin Trager, a spokesman for Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg, told ABC News in February that the city and police are committed to the reforms agreed upon in the consent decree, “regardless of what happens in federal court.”

“Louisville Metro Government and LMPD will move forward and honor our commitment to meaningful improvements and reforms,” Trager said.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told ABC News in Febaruary that the city had “not heard directly” from the Trump administration regarding the consent decree, but the city plans to move forward with the terms of the agreement “with or without support from the White House.”

“It’s unfortunate the Trump administration may not be interested in cooperating with us to improve policing and support our community, but make no mistake: we have the tools, the resolve, and the community’s backing to fulfill our promise to the people of Minneapolis. Our work will not be stopped,” Frey said.

Following the new announcement from the DOJ on Wednesday, ABC News reached out to officials in Minneapolis and Louisville for additional comment.

The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division is also planning to close its investigations into police departments in Phoenix; Trenton, New Jersey; Memphis, Tennessee; Mount Vernon, New York; Oklahoma City; and the Louisiana State Police, according to the announcement.

Additionally, the department said it will be “retracting” findings released during the Biden administration against departments alleged to have engaged in widespread misconduct against citizens.

“Overboard police consent decrees divest local control of policing from communities where it belongs, turning that power over to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, often with an anti-police agenda,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a statement announcing the moves. “Today, we are ending the Biden Civil Rights Division’s failed experiment of handcuffing local leaders and police departments with factually unjustified consent decrees.”

This is a developing story. Please come back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans have worked through the night to move a megabill advancing President Donald Trump’s legislative agenda through a key committee — aiming to overcome division in the conference and advance the package to a House floor vote as soon as Wednesday.

The House Rules Committee hearing is going strong Wednesday morning after it started at 1 a.m. ET Wednesday with committee chairs and ranking members debating the details of the more than 1,000 page “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

The GOP is far from unified around the bill with several sticking points among Republican hard-liners primarily regarding Medicaid work requirements and a cap on state and local tax deductions. Trump spoke to Republicans on Capitol Hill Tuesday in an effort to persuade them to back his signature bill — at one point threatening to primary those who vote against it.

Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, one of the holdouts, said there is “no way” the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” passes in the House Wednesday — despite Speaker Mike Johnson’s goal of putting the bill on the floor as early as Wednesday after it clears the Rules Committee. Johnson is still working to secure holdouts’ votes, and still appears to lack the votes to pass the legislation on the House floor.

“We’re further away from a deal,” Harris said on Newsmax Wednesday morning. “This bill actually got worse overnight. There is no way it passes today.”

Key components of the legislation are set to come up in the Rules Committee Wednesday morning, which will focus on tax provisions, overhaul of SNAP and Medicaid cuts. However, GOP leaders have still not released expected changes — negotiated by hard-liners and moderates — to the tax and budget bill.

Rules Committee Chair Rep. Virginia Foxx emphasized that Republicans need to move forward on their bill to “ensure our economic survival.” She added that Republican changes to the package will be unveiled at some point during the hearing.

Meanwhile, Rep. Jim McGovern, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, lambasted Republicans’ reconciliation bill.

“I’ve got a simple question. What the hell are Republicans so afraid of? What the hell are you so scared of that you guys are holding this hearing at 1 o’clock in the morning. It’s a simple question that speaks to the heart of what’s going on here, and one that I’m going to keep on asking, if Republicans are so proud of what is in this bill, then why are you trying to ram it through in the dead of night?” McGovern said.

Overnight, several Republican members left as Democrats burned the midnight oil — introducing various amendments to the package.

Ranking Member Bennie Thompson of Homeland Security expressed frustration with the process overnight.

“I described Homeland Security portion of this bill as putting lipstick on a pig. I come from an agricultural district as well as a part of the country. So let me use another farming analogy to wrap up: We may be here in the dead of night, but you do not need the light of day to smell manure. The American people are not going to be fooled by any middle-of-the-night, manure-slinging here,” the Mississippi Democrat said, adding that it “stinks to high heaven.”

There have been 537 amendments submitted from both Democrats and Republicans to the reconciliation package.

Overnight, several committee chairs and ranking members testified before the powerful panel including Armed Services, Budget, Oversight, Natural Resources, Financial Services, Judiciary, Homeland Security, Transportation, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Agriculture and Education.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINTON) — Officially titled the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act,” this megabill fulfills a laundry list of President Donald Trump’s campaign promises from taxes to border security.

As House Republicans continue to negotiate the final details of the legislation, here’s a look at some possible ways the bill could affect everyday Americans, according to recent estimates.

Keep in mind, the Senate is likely to significantly change this bill and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) continues to review the legislation.

Some potential impacts:

• More than an estimated 8 million recipients could lose Medicaid coverage, according to a CBO analysis requested by House Democrats. Republicans say they’re targeting able-bodied adults and undocumented immigrants, but other beneficiaries could also be impacted.
• Cuts SNAP food assistance by roughly $230 billion over 10 years, narrowing participation in the program servicing roughly one-in-eight Americans each month
• Extends the 2017 Trump tax cuts
• Fulfils Trump’s campaign promises of no taxes on tips and no taxes on overtime work
• Provides $50 billion wall to renew construction of Trump’s border wall
• Commits roughly $150 billion in defense spending for shipbuilding and ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system
• It’s important to note, the impacts of the bill are estimates based on early analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The estimates – and legislative text – have not been finalized.

Changes in Medicaid work requirements

Republicans say their main goal is reducing “waste, fraud, and abuse” within Medicaid, the health care program for lower income Americans and those with disabilities, in order to achieve hundreds of billions in savings over the next decade.

Early estimates requested by House Democrats put the number of people who could lose coverage at more than 8 million, but that number continues to fluctuate and the Congressional Budget Office has not yet released its final score of the GOP bill, which is not yet even finalized itself.

The bill imposes new work requirements on able-bodied Medicaid recipients aged 19-64 who don’t have dependents, which includes working at least 80 hours per month. The bill also requires states to conduct eligibility redeterminations at least every 6 months for all recipients.

The legislation also removes undocumented migrants from Medicaid eligibility (per the White House, this accounts for approximately 1.4 million undocumented migrants losing coverage provided through state Medicaid programs).

Under the bill’s current text, these work requirements don’t kick in until 2029, as President Trump leaves office. But House Republican hardliners are looking at moving that date up to 2026 or 2027 in their negotiations with leadership.

The bill also increases copays for Medicaid recipients who make more than the federal poverty limit, for single beneficiaries that’s just over $15,500. They would be required to pay an extra $35 dollar copay in some visits.

It also increases the required Medicaid paperwork for income and residency verification as lawmakers look to crack down on people who are “double-dipping” in multiple jurisdictions. These additional steps are expected to especially impact seniors and others who can’t promptly respond.

SNAP cuts

The bill tightens eligibility requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), what used to be called “food stamps” program, which helped roughly 42 million low-income people per month buy groceries in 2024.

Adults aged 55-64 and children would face additional work requirements to qualify for SNAP benefits.

The bill also shifts some SNAP costs to the states. The program is currently 100% federally funded. This bill requires states to share in at least 5 percent of SNAP benefit costs starting in 2028.

The SNAP cuts total an estimated $230 billion over 10 years.

The changes could have an indirect impact on school lunch programs, requiring some previously eligible families to apply for access and impact federal reimbursement payments for some school districts.

No tax on tips and overtime pay

This addition to the bill helps Trump fulfill one of his major campaign promises — exempting workers who receive tips from paying federal income taxes on them, as long as they make less than $160,000 a year. The tax break would expire at the end of 2028, after the next presidential election, according to the proposal.

Expanding Trump tax cuts

Makes tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent that fiscal hawks complain adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade; does not include a tax increase on the wealthiest earners. Trump posted last week that the proposal shouldn’t raise taxes on high-earners, “but I’m OK if they do!!!”

Creation of MAGA savings account for children

The bill would create so-called MAGA savings accounts for parents to open for their children. The contribution limit for any taxable year is $5,000. It includes a pilot program to start the accounts with $1,000.

Raising the SALT cap

The current bill raises the deduction limit of state and local taxes from your federal income tax filing from $10,000 to $30,000 for joint filers making less than $400,000 per year.

Republicans from states such as New York and California are pushing House Republican leadership to further increase that cap to help their constituents. Hardliners warn increasing that limit would worsen the deficit.

On the campaign trail, Trump promised to eliminate the SALT cap first imposed by the 2017 tax law he signed during his first term.

More money for border security enforcement

The legislation provides almost $50 billion to revive construction of Trump’s wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and it makes changes to immigration policy.

The bill includes $4 billion to hire an additional 3,000 new Border Patrol agents as well as 5,000 new customs officers, and $2.1 billion for signing and retention bonuses.

There’s also funds for 10,000 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and investigators.

It includes major changes to immigration policy, imposing a $1,000 fee on migrants seeking asylum, which has never been done before in the United States.

The bill includes a $4 trillion increase to the statutory debt limit as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent calls on Congress to act by the end of July.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem incorrectly responded to a lawmaker’s question on the definition of habeas corpus during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on the Department of Homeland Security budget for the upcoming year on Tuesday.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked Noem, “What is habeas corpus?”

The secretary responded, saying, “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country.”

“Excuse me, that’s — that’s incorrect,” Hassan interjected.

“Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires, requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason,” she said.

“Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea,” Hassan added. “As a senator from the ‘Live Free or Die’ state, this matters a lot to me and my constituents and to all Americans.”

Hassan then asked, “Secretary Noem, do you support the core protection that habeas corpus provides that the government must provide a public reason in order to detain and imprison someone?”

“I support habeas corpus,” Noem responded. “I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not.”

Hassan interrupted Noem, saying, “It has never been done. It has never been done without approval of Congress. Even Abraham Lincoln got retroactive approval from Congress.”

Later in the hearing, Noem denied any involvement in a reported reality television show featuring the Department of Homeland Security in which immigrants would compete for U.S. citizenship.

“We have no knowledge of a reality show,” Noem said. “There may have been something submitted to the department, but I did not know anything about this reality show until the reporter reached out.”

Noem then took aim at The Wall Street Journal’s reporting, saying, “That article — in fact, they had to change it later because they lied so bad, and they had us on the record saying I had no knowledge of a reality show. The department didn’t — there may have been something submitted somewhere along the line because there are proposals pitched to the department, but me and my executive team have no knowledge of a reality show and it’s not under consideration.”

“That article was completely inaccurate, completely inaccurate and false, and the fact that they printed it when they knew it was false was a dereliction of their work,” she added.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump is hosting South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa at the White House on Wednesday amid tensions between the two nations over the U.S. resettlement of white South Africans.

Trump and other top officials have claimed that a race-based “genocide” is unfolding against white farmers in the country. South African officials, including Ramaphosa, have vehemently pushed back, arguing that is not the case.

“It’s a genocide that’s taking place,” President Trump said last week. “Farmers are being killed. They happen to be white. But whether they are white or Black makes no difference to me. But white farmers are being brutally killed, and their land is being confiscated in South Africa.”

That same day, the first flight of Afrikaners arrived at Washington Dulles International Airport.

Ramaphosa responded that the individuals who went to the U.S. “do not fit the definition of a refugee” — someone who is leaving their country out of fear of persecution due to race, religion, political opinion or nationality.

“And I had a conversation with President Trump on the phone, and I — he asked, he said, ‘What’s happening down there?'” Ramaphosa said. “And I said, ‘President, what you’ve been told by those people who are opposed to transformation back home in South Africa is not true.'”

The South African government, in a statement last week, said its police statistics on farm-related crimes “do not support allegations of violent crime targeted at farmers generally or any particular race.”

The dozens of Afrikaners who arrived in the U.S. last week had their applications fast-tracked under an executive order issued by Trump in February titled, “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.”

The order contends the South African government passed a law allowing it to “seize ethnic minority Afrikaners’ agricultural property without compensation” in a “shocking disregard of its’ citizen rights.” It instructs that the U.S. will not provide aid or assistance to the nation, and that the U.S. “promote the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees.”

The law passed by South Africa cited by the administration aims to address land injustices established during apartheid. It states land can be expropriated in the public interest and in most cases must be subject to compensation, the amount of which must have been agreed to by the owners or approved by court. Experts say the law is comparable to similar legislation around the world regarding eminent domain.

In addition to Trump’s executive order, his administration expelled South Africa’s Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool from the U.S. earlier this year.

Trump has been scrutinized for prioritizing Afrikaners while moving to restrict immigration from elsehwere, including from Afghanistan, Venezuela and Haiti.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio was asked to defend the administration’s position while testifying before a Senate panel on Tuesday.

“I think those 49 people that came strongly felt they were persecuted, and they passed every sort of check mark that needed to be checked off,” Rubio said. “The president identified it as a problem and wanted to use it as an example.”

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said he believed the claim there is persecution of Afrikaner farmers was “completely specious” and noted the U.S. hadn’t let in Black South Africans during apartheid.

“I think that the United States has a right to allow into this country and prioritize the allowance of who they want to allow it come in,” Rubio responded.

Elon Musk, a South African native and a top adviser to the president during his second term, has also been vocal about the plight of South African landowners, amplifying claims of “white genocide.”

Ramaphosa on Tuesday projected optimism about the upcoming talks with Trump.

“We’re always ready and we hope to have really good discussions with President Trump and his fellow government colleagues. Looking forward to a really good and positive meeting, and we’re looking forward to a really good outcome for our country, for our people, for the jobs in our country and good trade relations,” Ramaphosa told reporters as he arrived at the South African Embassy in Washington.

He said trade is the “the most important, that is what has brought us here” and that they want to strengthen economic ties between the two nations in a video posted to X. Ramaphosa also said he and Trump will discuss Israel as well as Russia and Ukraine.

Ramaphosa didn’t mention the United States’ prioritization of the resettlement of white South African refugees in the videos posted to social media, though he vowed to protect South Africa’s sovereignty.

“We will always do what is best for South Africans,” he said.

ABC News’ Shannon Kingston contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning turned up the heat on House Republican holdout votes endangering passage of the megabill aimed at advancing his legislative agenda, sources told ABC News.

Trump spoke to the conference as more than a dozen Republicans seek additional changes to the legislation. Without changes, there is enough opposition to defeat it as Speaker Mike Johnson can only afford to lose three votes.

Trump used an expletive to urge House Republican conference members not to mess with Medicaid and to vote in favor of his bill Tuesday morning, sources told ABC News.

That demand comes as hard-liners push for stricter Medicaid cuts just a day or so before the massive bill — full of a laundry list of Trump’s campaign promises — is expected to head to the floor. Johnson is aiming for a vote on Wednesday.

Another sticking point among Republican holdouts is a cap on state and local tax deductions. And sources tell ABC News that Trump told the cadre of Republicans pushing for a higher cap on the state and local tax deduction (SALT) to take the current deal on the table and “move on.”

Trump urged Republicans to stick together and get the bill done — and deliver for the American people, according to a White House official.

A White House official told ABC News that Trump is losing patience with the Republican holdouts, including the SALT Caucus and the House Freedom Caucus. The president made it clear that he wants every Republican to vote yes on the bill, the official added.

Leaving the House GOP conference meeting, Trump said the meeting went well, but pushed back against those reports that he’s losing patience with Republican holdouts.

“I think it was a really great; that was a meeting of love. Let me tell you, that was love in that room. There was no shouting. I think it was a meeting of love,” Trump told reporters, later adding that anyone who said he was losing patience was “a liar.”

Projecting confidence, Trump said “we’re going to get it done,” adding that “we’re ahead of schedule.”

So was Trump’s pressure campaign enough to move those on the fence to the yes column?

Asked if he thinks Trump moved any votes, holdout Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., said “yeah, I suppose so.” Still Biggs didn’t commit to supporting the bill.

Fellow holdout Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., said Trump “did a great job,” but declined to say whether Trump changed his mind.

Other hard-liners tell ABC News that they still believe changes to the bill — like those additional Medicaid cuts — could still be on the table. Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., said he believes more “tweaks” can be made before the bill goes to the House Rules Committee at 1 a.m. Wednesday morning.

But time is running out and Trump was clear he doesn’t want any more delays.

Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries sent a letter to Johnson and Rules Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, requesting they “immediately reschedule” that 1 a.m. Rules Committee meeting.

The New York Democrat decried the legislation for what he called the “largest” cut to Medicaid and nutritional assistance in American history.

“It is deeply troubling that you would attempt to jam this legislation down the throats of the American people,” Jeffries wrote in a statement to his colleagues. “What else are you hiding?”

“It is imperative that you immediately reschedule the meeting so that it may be debated in the light of day,” Jeffries added. Republicans scheduled the hearing at the earliest possible hour in compliance with House rules after the Budget Committee approved the package late Sunday.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump — flanked by Johnson — issued a stern warning for Republicans who don’t fall in line on the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” warning they could be primaried if they vote against his signature bill.

Trump emphasized that the GOP is a unified party, but also added that people aren’t going to get everything they want in the bill.

“Well it’s not a question of holdouts, we have a tremendously unified party. We’ve never had a party like this. There’s some people that want a couple of things that maybe I don’t like or that they’re not going to get, but I think we’re going to have tremendous — not luck. We have tremendous talent,” Trump said.

After the president left, Republican leaders delivered remarks but took no questions — telling reporters he had to “tie up the remaining loose ends” with holdouts.

“Failure is simply not an option,” the Louisiana Republican said. “We have to get this done.”

ABC News’ Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — In a copy of “Original Sin, President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again” obtained by ABC News, authors and journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson allege that former President Joe Biden hid information about the cancer diagnosis of his late son, Beau Biden, who was an elected official at the time.

Not only do the authors claim that this misled the public about Beau Biden’s mental fitness, they also say this demonstrates “the Bidens’ capacity for denial and the lengths they would go to avoid transparency about health issues.”

Released Tuesday, this new detail comes just days after Joe Biden’s aggressive prostate cancer was announced.

Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis was announced Sunday via statement from his office. According to the statement, he was seen by medical professionals “last week” for “a new finding of a prostate nodule after experiencing increasing urinary symptoms,” and “on Friday, he was diagnosed.”

“Original Sin” claims that Joe Biden and Beau Biden falsely touted Beau’s “clean bill of health,” intentionally choosing to say “nothing” despite being aware of his glioblastoma diagnosis and how advanced it was.

In the summer of 2013, Beau Biden collapsed during a family vacation and underwent brain surgery to remove a tumor.

“Beau’s tumor was definitely glioblastoma. Stage IV,” Biden later wrote about the postoperative findings, according to the book. The authors say Joe Biden’s other son Hunter Biden called it “a death sentence.”

Beau Biden’s neurologist told the public that doctors had removed a “small lesion” from his brain, but it was in fact a “tumor slightly larger than a golf ball,” Biden later revealed, according to the book.

The book also alleges that Beau remained in office as Delaware’s attorney general, a position he held from 2007 to 2015, despite displaying signs of deterioration such as speech difficulties and “secretly” undergoing treatments around the world where he checked in under an alias.

In a statement released Tuesday, a Biden spokesman said, “There is nothing in this book that shows Joe Biden failed to do his job, as the authors have alleged, nor did they prove their allegation that there was a cover up or conspiracy. Nowhere do they show that our national security was threatened or where the President wasn’t otherwise engaged in the important matters of the Presidency,” a Biden spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News reacting to the publication of “Original Sin.”

“In fact, Joe Biden was an effective President who led our country with empathy and skill,” the statement added.

The authors say Beau Biden’s wife Hallie publicly questioned this apparent cover-up, allegedly telling others that “she didn’t understand why they had to keep his illness a secret.”

ABC News is attempting to reach Hallie Biden for comment.

The book goes on to claim that Beau Biden’s death and the emotional toll it had on the then-vice president demonstrated the “first signs he was deteriorating” in 2015, citing a senior White House official that described Joe Biden’s brain as seeming to “dissolve like someone poured hot water” immediately after Beau’s death.

“Original Sin” has additional allegations against Biden and his mental fitness during his presidency, including details about his physical and mental impairments and alleged efforts to cover those impairments up.

In an appearance on ABC’s “The View” earlier this month, both Biden and former first lady Dr. Jill Biden pushed back against the slate of new books from reporters claiming that Biden was dealing with cognitive decline at the end of his presidency.

“They are wrong,” he said. “There’s nothing to sustain that.”

-ABC News Averi Harper, Oren Oppenheim and Brittany Shepherd contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump will announce initial plans for the “Golden Dome” missile defense plan, a massive missile shield system meant to protect the United States, at the White House Tuesday afternoon, three U.S. officials confirmed.

Trump will be joined by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and one official said Gen. Michael Guetlein, the vice chief of space operations, will be there and will be announced as the official leading the department’s planning for the ground-based and space-based missile defense system.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEWARK, N.J.) — New Jersey Rep. LaMonica McIver was charged on Monday for allegedly assaulting law enforcement officers outside of an ICE detention facility earlier this month.

Acting U.S. Attorney Alina Habba announced she was charging the congresswoman with assaulting and impeding a law enforcement officer.

On May 9, McIver, along with a few other members of Congress and Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, were protesting outside of Delaney Hall, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility.

Tensions at the protest escalated and pushing and shoving allegedly occurred, according to the U.S. attorney.

“Representative LaMonica McIver assaulted, impeded, and interfered with law enforcement in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 111(a)(1),” Habba said in a statement. “That conduct cannot be overlooked by the chief federal law enforcement official in the State of New Jersey, and it is my Constitutional obligation to ensure that our federal law enforcement is protected.”

“No one is above the law — politicians or otherwise. It is the job of this office to uphold Justice, regardless of who you are. Now we will let the justice system work,” Habba added.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem echoed Habba’s decision in a post on social media.

“If any person, regardless of political party, influence or status, assaults a law enforcement officer as we witnessed Congresswoman McIver do, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Noem wrote on X. “We thank our brave ICE law enforcement officers for their service to this great nation.”

President Donald Trump also claimed McIver was “out of control” while commenting on the charges at the Capitol on Tuesday.

“I have no idea who she is,” Trump told reporters. “That woman was out of control. She was shoving federal agents. She was out of control. The days of that crap are over in this country. We’re going to have law and order.”

Following the charges, McIver alleged in a statement that the decision was politically motivated.

“The charges against me are purely political — they mischaracterize and distort my actions, and are meant to criminalize and deter legislative oversight,” McIver said. “This administration will never stop me from working for the people in our district and standing up for what is right. I am thankful for the outpouring of support I have received and I look forward to the truth being laid out clearly in court,” she added.

The complaint alleges McIver tried to “thwart the arrest” of Baraka after he had been told to leave the secured area of the facility because, unlike the congresspeople, he did not have lawful authority to be there. She is accused of making “forcible contact” with authorities, including allegedly slamming her forearm into a Homeland Security Investigations agent and pushing and using “each of her forearms to forcibly strike” an ICE officer, according to the complaint.

The complaint includes multiple stills from officer body camera footage showing what prosecutors allege were McIver’s “multiple attempts to forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, and interfere with the agents attempting to take the Mayor into custody.”

The charges against Baraka were dropped by the U.S. attorney.

Baraka said in a statement on X that he was glad the trespassing charge against him was dismissed, but that he stands with McIver and believes she will be “vindicated.”

“I want to be clear: I stand with LaMonica, and I fully expect her to be vindicated,” the mayor wrote.

Top House Democrats also released a joint statement defending McIver on Monday, vowing to “vigorously” respond to what they say is an illegitimate abuse of power.

“An attack on one of us is an attack on the American people. House Democrats will respond vigorously in the days to come at a time, place and manner of our choosing,” the leaders said.

Additionally, the party leaders noted that McIver toured the facility after the alleged altercation. “There is no credible evidence that Rep. McIver engaged in any criminal activity, and she would not have been permitted to tour the facility had she done anything wrong,” the lawmakers claimed.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A 20-year-old Venezuelan man seeking a return to the United States after being sent to El Salvador won a legal victory over President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday.

A divided panel of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to leave in place an order directing the Trump administration to facilitate the man’s return after a federal judge in Maryland determined that his deportation breached an existing legal settlement.

The man, identified in court records by the pseudonym “Cristian,” challenged his removal after he was sent in mid-March on a flight to El Salvador following President Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.

U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, a Trump appointee, found in April that Cristian’s removal violated a class action settlement on behalf of individuals who entered the U.S. as unaccompanied minors and later sought asylum.

The administration then asked the appellate court to reverse Gallagher’s order, arguing that the directive to return Cristian to the U.S. “would impose serious foreign-policy harms on the Government and threaten the public interest, while doing nothing for Cristian,” according to the government’s court filings.

Circuit Judges DeAndrea Gist Benjamin and Roger Gregory, writing for the panel’s majority, rejected the administration’s reasoning.

“The argument that the Government would be ‘irreparably harmed’ by facilitating Cristian’s return rings hollow,” Benjamin wrote. “Cristian’s injury arises from the fact that instead of having his asylum application adjudicated on the merits—as the Settlement Agreement guaranteed—he was summarily removed,” added Benjamin, a Biden appointee to the circuit court.

The government argued in its motion to stay that removing Cristian under the Alien Enemies Act was not a breach of the settlement agreement, which was finalized in 2024.

The government also challenged Gallagher’s order on the grounds that an “Indicative Asylum Decision,” issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) weeks after Cristian’s deportation, determined he would be denied asylum because he is an admitted Tren de Aragua gang member, which he denies.

The government also notes Cristian has a felony drug possession conviction in Harris County, Texas.

ABC News has reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and Cristian’s lawyers for a comment.

The appellate panel majority, however, determined that the “indicative” asylum decision, reached without an opportunity for Cristian to contest its findings, “was not an authentic change in factual circumstances.”

In a concurring opinion, Gregory, a Clinton appointee, criticized the Trump administration for its attempt to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to excuse its alleged breach of the settlement agreement in this case.

“The government’s argument in this case is that this plainly invalid invocation of the Act can be used to void any and all contractual obligations of the federal government. That cannot be — and is not — the rule of law,” Gregory wrote.

In his dissent, Circuit Judge Julius Richardson — a Trump appointee — argued that the district court’s order exceeded its authority; and that returning Cristian to the United States would be futile, given the near-certainty that his application for asylum would be denied.

“Still, it is in this case that the district court has directed the Executive to engage in specific diplomatic negotiations with a foreign power. Despite serious merits problems and little reason to think its order would help Cristian, the district court entered a more potent injunction than any other court has in the numerous Alien Enemies cases pending across the country.” Richardson wrote.

The Trump administration could now ask the full 4th Circuit Court of Appeals to review the case or petition for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.