Nadler, Raskin push Jordan for investigation into DHS handcuffing of staffer
Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) are demanding House Judiciary Committee Republicans launch an investigation after officers from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) pushed their way into the New York Democrat's office and handcuffed one of his staffers.
The incident began after Nadler's office last week allowed protesters to enter their office after demonstrating at an immigration court housed within the same federal building.
While the DHS accused the congressional office of 'harboring rioters,' Nadler referred to those in his office as 'observers.'
'A statement issued later by DHS claimed the agents were doing a 'security check,' and yet the video that has been released shows them handcuffing a staffer, demanding access to non-public areas of Rep. Nadler's office, and never once asking about the safety and security of his staff,' wrote Nadler and Raskin, the top Democrat on the panel, in the joint letter.
'These types of intimidation tactics are completely unwarranted and cannot be tolerated. The decision to enter a congressional office and detain a congressional staff member demonstrates a deeply troubling disregard for proper legal boundaries. We call on you, as Chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, to condemn this aggressive affront to the separation of powers and the safety of Members of Congress, our staff, and our constituents.'
Nadler during an interview on CNN on Monday blasted the DHS, accusing them of lying about the incident.
'They barged in. And in barging in one of the offices, a very big, heavyset fellow pushed my aide — a very petite young woman — and they then said that she pushed back and they shackled her and took her downstairs,' Nadler told the outlet.
'And she was obviously traumatized.'
Video of the incident shows a Nadler staffer crying as she is handcuffed.
The DHS later clarified the agents were Federal Protective Service personnel, who provide security at federal buildings. The officials were not there to harass Nadler's staff, the agency said, but to protect it.
But the statement does not mention that nearly two dozen people were arrested in connection with the protests.
'Federal Protective Service (FPS) officers responded to information that protesters were present inside U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler's District Office in Manhattan, New York. Based on earlier incidents in a nearby facility, FPS officers were concerned about the safety of the federal employees in the office and went to the location to ensure the safety and wellbeing of those present. Upon arrival, officers were granted entry and encountered four individuals,' the DHS said in a statement.
'Officers identified themselves and explained their intent to conduct a security check, however, one individual became verbally confrontational and physically blocked access to the office. The officers then detained the individual in the hallway for the purpose of completing the security check. All were released without further incident.'
Jordan's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The two Democratic lawmakers called the incident 'part of a broader pattern by President Donald J. Trump and DHS of using unlawful, chaotic, and reckless tactics in communities across America.'
'The time is now to halt the use of these illegitimate tactics and to ensure that DHS complies with the law and with the norms of common human decency,' they wrote.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump Lets News Outlets Know He's Got No Plans To Talk To Elon Musk: 'The Poor Guy Has Got A Problem'
Donald Trump spent part of Friday morning letting some news outlets know that he has no plans to talk to Elon Musk, even amid talk of a potential truce in their messy fallout. On CNN, Dana Bash said that she got off the phone with Trump, and the president told her, 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy has got a problem.' More from Deadline U.S. Job Growth Stays In Line With Expectations At 139,000 In May Even Amid Federal Workforce Cuts Trump Vs Musk Gets BBC 'Have I Got News For You' Treatment After Meltdown Occurs During Recording Late Night Hosts Take On Trump-Musk Feud: "Vader Turns On The Emperor Again" 'He says he won't be speaking to him for a while, but he wishes Elon Musk well,' Bash said, as Trump turned to the economy. She said that Trump didn't sound angry but 'I guess more resigned.' ABC News' Jonathan Karl also spoke to Trump, and said the president told him that he was 'not particularly' interested in talking to him. Karl had asked him about reports that there would be a call with Musk some time on Friday. 'You mean the man who has lost his mind?' Trump said. Trump also spoke to CBS News' Robert Costa, and insisted that he was 'totally' focused on policy matters. Meanwhile, Fox News and other outlets reported that Trump plans to give away or sell the red Tesla that he purchased from Musk earlier this year. The two had appeared on the White House lawn in March for what essentially was a sales pitch for Musk's cars, amid reports of declining sales due in part to the negative image many potential buyers had of the billionaire in his chainsaw-like approach to the federal government. As the feud between Musk and Trump escalated on Thursday, White House reporter posted photos of the Tesla, parked near the West Wing. Musk had given some indication later on Thursday that he would tone it down. After one X user suggested that Musk and Trump 'cool off and take a step back for a couple days,' Musk wrote, 'Good advice.' He also appeared to back off his threat to decommission Dragon, the program to supply NASA with spacecraft to resupply and send astronauts to the space station. The White House has tried to shift attention to the economy, amid a rather static jobs report on Friday. But the soap opera, reality show- like feud has dominated cable news coverage, podcasts, primetime opinion programming and late night. Musk reportedly poured $277 million into the 2024 election to help Trump and other Republicans, and there was expectation that he would invest heavily in next year's midterms. But as the Trump-Musk relationship fizzled this week, the billionaire, who is the world's richest man, threatened to work to defeat GOP candidates who voted for the signature piece of Trump's agenda, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Musk also talked of a third party and supported the idea of impeaching Trump. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series


UPI
43 minutes ago
- UPI
Federal jduge blocks Trump administration Harvard student ban
June 6 (UPI) -- A federal judge temporarily paused President Donald Trump's ban on foreign nationals coming to study, teach, or do research at Harvard University, pending a hearing later in June. U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs' ruling Thursday night came after Harvard filed a suit in Boston alleging Trump's proclamation, issued a day earlier, was unlawful because it violated the First Amendment. Burroughs said she was granting Harvard's motion for a restraining order against the Homeland Security Department, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Justice Department, State Department and the Student and Exchange Visitor Program after accepting Harvard's claim that it would otherwise "sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there was an opportunity to hear from all parties." The motion was in a hastily amended complaint by Harvard after Trump on Wednesday suspended entry of all foreign nationals "who enter or attempt to enter the United States to begin attending Harvard," and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider cancelling the visas of foreigners already there. She said the court would reconvene on June 16 for a full hearing on whether Trump's proclamation is legal. Burroughs' order also extended through June 20 a temporary restraining order she issued May 23, preventing DHS from implementing a ban on Harvard sponsoring holders of F-1 and J-1 non-immigrant visas, something the university has been permitted to do for more than seven decades. The school's legal team argued Wednesday's proclamation was an effort to get around this restraining order. "The proclamation simply reflects the administration's effort to accomplish the very result that the Court sought to prevent. The Court should not stand for that," Harvard's legal counsel alleged in court filings. Harvard has maintained that the orders represent executive overreach, while Trump insists there is a national security risk posed by its foreign students. The Trump administration has demanded that Harvard water down its diversity, equality and inclusion policies in hiring and admissions, beef up enforcement of anti-Semitism measures on campus following anti-Gaza war protests and hand over the records of its international students. Trump's proclamation stated that the step was in the national interest because he believed Harvard's refusal to share "information that the federal government requires to safeguard national security and the American public" showed it was not suitable for foreign nationals. In April, Trump cancelled more than $2 billion in federal funding that the university receives and threatened to remove its tax-exemption status and ability to enroll overseas students. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told The Hill that Harvard's lawsuit was a bid to "kneecap the President's constitutionally vested powers" to suspend entry to the country of persons whose presence was not in line with national interests. "It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their multibillion-dollar endowments," McLaughlin said. "The Trump administration is committed to restoring common sense to our student visa system; no lawsuit, this or any other, is going to change that. We have the law, the facts, and common sense on our side."


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Kelly Evans: Musk, Trump, and "the Bill"
As absolutely delicious as the personal drama between Elon Musk and Donald Trump is--and as much as it may escalate into everything from robotaxis to SpaceX and national defense--let's not lose sight of the deficit fight that's at the heart of it. Musk's beef with Trump after he was dismissed from service first erupted over the "One Big Beautiful Bill." A "disgusting abomination," Musk called it on X this week. "Shame on those who voted for it." He went on to repost tons of old tweets from Trump, along with current Senate and Congressional Republican leaders, calling out their hypocrisy for criticizing past debt levels and deficits even as they now support a bill that would raise the debt ceiling by trillions and increase deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. Yesterday, when asked about Musk's criticism--which could sink the entire bill, if enough Senate Republicans like Ron Johnson and their constituents turn against it--the president chalked it up to sour grapes over the bill's failure to extend EV tax credits. But Musk insists that's not the case, and few really expected the credits to be continued anyway. No, it seems Musk's real beef, assuming this isn't just a convenient way for him to reposition himself with the broader public, seems to be over the cost of Trump's megabill. But here's the rub. This isn't just any old stimulus act, or grab-bag of political preferences. There is a ticking time bomb hanging over the economy this year, because Trump's first-term tax cuts are going to expire at year-end. The cost of this bill isn't over new stuff they want to do--it's mostly just extending the status quo. That alone costs $4 trillion over the next decade. So while it's a very attractive argument that Musk is making--I'd love to know what exactly he would propose doing instead. Would he prefer that taxes go up on households and businesses next year? Fine, if so; that's the Democratic party's position. But I have yet to hear him embrace that either tactically or philosophically. This is where the issue of "SALT" comes in. It would cost $377 billion over the next decade, according to Heritage, to quadruple the cap--and this would be new tax relief. But again, this is a small percentage of the overall cost. And it could be the difference between Republicans keeping their tiny majority in the House, or not. House Speaker Mike Johnson made this clear on Squawk Box this morning. "If we don't deliver on this [bill], and we don't deliver a little bit on SALT relief, then we're not going to have the House majority," he said. "And if the Democrats take over, they will impeach Donald everything will go to chaos. So this team has to stay in power." He also implied Democrats would deliver even worse fiscal outcomes. But perhaps none of that matters to Musk, who would practically seem to be leading the impeachment drive, the way things are going this week. Perhaps he disagrees that Democrats would be worse for the fiscal situation. Or perhaps he senses that party would now be much more sympathetic to his EV and robotaxi ambitions. Point being, if Musk blows up the budget bill, and takes a hard fiscal line on any subsequent negotiations, the GOP isn't going to turn around and gut Medicare or Medicaid--which it's struggling to pare back at all right now--in order to balance the budget. No, it just means that taxes are going up at year-end. See you at 1 p.m! Kelly Twitter: @KellyCNBC Instagram: @realkellyevans