Latest news with #SpeechandDebateClause
Boston Globe
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Don't blink. The arrest of a lawmaker is a constitutional crisis in motion.
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up McIver is now living proof that the constitutional crisis is escalating. 'If I'm going to be charged with a crime for doing my job, it just speaks to where we're headed in this country,' McIver said in a CNN interview Tuesday morning. Advertisement McIver was in fact doing her job, which includes oversight of federal Homeland Security operations. McIver, who conducted the visit with two other members of Congress, had 'They gave us a tour and allowed us to go in, and tour the facility, and speak to detainees,' McIver told CNN. These facts suggest acting US attorney for New Jersey and former defense lawyer for President Trump Alina Habba may need to brush up on her constitutional law. The Speech and Debate Clause protects lawmakers from facing arrest in the course of carrying out their legislative duties. Courts, including the Supreme Court, have interpreted it to extend beyond the debate floor and even halls of Congress, saying it applies to other legislative duties, including conducting oversight. The only exceptions are in cases of 'Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace.' That last category must be what Habba is trying to hang her hat on — to the extent that she considered the Constitution at all before charging McIver. 'I have persistently made efforts to address these issues without bringing criminal charges and have given Representative McIver every opportunity to come to a resolution, but she has unfortunately declined,' Habba McIver told CNN: 'Alina Habba wanted me to admit to doing something that I did not do, and I was not going to do that.' The whole point of the Speech and Debate Clause is to prevent the executive branch from using its arrest power as a tool to intimidate people who have been elected by their constituents to carry out their legislative duties. Put short, the Framers were trying to keep any president from acting like a tyrannical monarch. Advertisement Unfortunately for Habba's case, there is The thin evidence likely means the constitutional problems with McIver's charges probably won't get any attention, as the case is likely to get swiftly dropped. I actually feel secondhand embarrassment for the career line prosecutor tasked with bringing this case before a court. But it is still important for Americans to clock this for what it is, as Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have. 'The targeting of Representative McIver is a blatant attempt to intimidate Members of Congress and to block our oversight of this administration's actions, which have been enjoined more than 150 times by federal courts,' Representative Jamie Raskin, ranking member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and other Democratic members Advertisement And make no mistake. They are coming. Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at
News18
21-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
US Lawmaker Nancy Mace Shares Nude Photo Of Herself During Hearing, Calls Ex-Fiancé 'Rapist'
Last Updated: The incident unfolded during a House Oversight Committee session where Nancy Mace was advocating for stronger laws against video voyeurism. In a dramatic and shocking scene, US' Republican lawmaker Nancy Mace showcased an alleged nude photo of herself during a congressional hearing, claiming it was secretly snapped without her consent by her former fiancé Patrick Bryant. The incident unfolded during a House Oversight Committee session where Mace was advocating for stronger laws against video voyeurism. While recounting her experience as a victim of what she described as non-consensual filming and sex crimes, the lawmaker revealed a poster behind her, featuring a blurred black-and-white screenshot of what she alleged was footage secretly taken of her in a private home. A yellow circle highlighted the figure she identified as herself. 'Freedom is not a theory – it's the right to sleep without someone's camera filming your naked body. I speak not just as a lawmaker, but as a survivor," the South Carolina Congresswoman said. 'Today I will show my naked body on one of the videos predator and rapist Patrick Bryant took of me and many other women," Mace declared in a post on X (formerly Twitter) just before the hearing. 'Without our knowledge. Without our permission. And without our consent," Mace said in a post on X prior to hearing. She also held up additional visuals, a photo of the alleged hidden camera location, a group picture featuring her ex, and images of other women she said were also victims, their identities blurred out. The lawmaker has accused Bryant, of not only secretly filming her but also of committing serious sexual offences, including rape and abuse – allegations he has categorically denied. Bryant Denies Allegations In a statement released Tuesday, Bryant called the claims 'false and outrageous," saying he 'categorically denies" any wrongdoing and will 'take additional steps to clear [his] name at the right time." 'I categorically deny the false and outrageous claims made by Nancy Mace," Bryant said in a statement. 'I have never raped anyone. I have never hidden cameras. These accusations are malicious and deeply personal," he said. The South Carolina Republican has previously spoken out about being a rape survivor and used Tuesday's hearing to amplify her call for stronger privacy protections Bryant claimed Mace was leveraging her congressional role to make legally protected accusations from the House floor. He further said that Mace was allegedly using the Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution to shield herself from potential lawsuits, as this clause grants lawmakers immunity for statements made in their official capacity. 'If she believed them to be true and there was evidence to support her accusations, she would say them outside the chamber, away from her public role and protections, and pursue them through proper legal channels," he said. Earlier in February, the South Carolina Republican had publicly spoken about her allegations. In a speech, she had claimed to have discovered incriminating evidence in a safe and on a phone belonging to her former partner. Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Mace sued for defamation over allegations in stunning floor speech
A man Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) accused of being part of a group of 'predators' in a stunning House floor speech is suing her for defamation. The complaint, filed Friday in federal court, sets up a battle over the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause, which shields lawmakers against lawsuits for things they say and do as part of their legislative work. Mace's office cited the protection in a press release about her floor remarks. Brian Musgrave was one of four men Mace named in the February speech in which she made a series of allegations of sexual abuse and voyeurism, naming Musgrave, her ex-fiance, and two other South Carolina men. All of the men have denied wrongdoing. 'Now, it is with unbridled disgust that Brian Musgrave through this lawsuit is forced to utter the words: 'I am not a rapist.' 'I am not a predator.' 'I am not a sex trafficker,'' the lawsuit states. 'Through this action, Brian Musgrave seeks to recover that which has been wrongfully taken from him – his good name and reputation,' it continues. Mace claimed to have found a hidden camera on a property owned by her ex-fiance and Musgrave that had intimate photos of women that were taken without their knowledge or consent. The complaint acknowledges Musgrave jointly owns the South Carolina condo with the congresswoman's ex-fiance, who is described as Musgrave's longtime friend. But the suit says Musgrave didn't place the camera, never had access to it and was not present for any of what Mace has alleged. Musgrave was not accused of the most serious offenses that Mace listed in the speech, such as being raped after having blacked out one night and believing she was 'purposefully incapacitated.' But she listed Musgrave along with the other three men and their photos on a sign she displayed on the House floor that said: 'Predators.' Filed in federal court in Charleston, S.C., the lawsuit names as defendants Mace and five unnamed people who are alleged to have conspired with her. The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel, an appointee of former President Obama. The lawsuit will be a major and uncommon test for the Speech and Debate protections given to lawmakers. A press release from Mace's about the speech at the time referenced that protection and defended the veracity of her allegations: 'Any and all statements made by Members on the House Floor are quintessential 'legislative acts,' and protected by the Speech and Debate clause afforded under the Constitution of the United States. Her statements tonight are not conjecture, they are not allegations, they are facts based on information she uncovered and documents she accidentally discovered.' Notably, Musgrave's claims do not focus on Mace's remarks on the House floor, instead taking aim at a prepared version she distributed to the press beforehand, her display of the poster outside her congressional office and a series of social media posts she made on the social platform X. 'While the speech and debate clause of the United States Constitution affords broad protection to members of Congress acting as part of its deliberative process, it does not transform the floor of Congress into a sanctuary for defamation, nor does it protect Congresswoman Mace's extra-Congressional defamatory statements surrounding her speech,' the lawsuit states. Mace's congressional office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
14-03-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Mace sued for defamation over allegations in stunning floor speech
A man that Rep. Nancy Mace accused of being part of a group of 'predators' in a stunning House floor speech is suing the South Carolina Republican for defamation. The complaint, filed in federal court on Friday, sets up a battle over the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause, which shields lawmakers against lawsuits for things they say and do as part of their legislative work. Mace's office cited the protection in a press release about her floor remarks. Brian Musgrave was one of four men that Mace named in the February speech in which she made a series of allegations of sexual abuse and voyeurism, naming Musgrave, her ex-fiancé, and two other South Carolina men. All of the men have denied wrongdoing. 'Now, it is with unbridled disgust that Brian Musgrave through this lawsuit is forced to utter the words: 'I am not a rapist.' 'I am not a predator.' 'I am not a sex trafficker,'' the lawsuit states. 'Through this action, Brian Musgrave seeks to recover that which has been wrongfully taken from him – his good name and reputation,' it continues. Mace claimed to have found a hidden camera on a property owned by her ex-fiancé and Musgrave that had intimate photos of women that were taken without their knowledge or consent. The complaint acknowledges Musgrave jointly owns the South Carolina condo with the congresswoman's ex-fiancé, who is described as Musgrave's longtime friend. But the suit says Musgrave didn't place the camera, never had access to it and was not present for any of what Mace has alleged. Musgrave was not accused of the most serious offenses that Mace listed in the speech, such as being raped after having blacked out one night and believing she was 'purposefully incapacitated.' But she listed Musgrave along with the other three men and their photos on a sign she displayed on the House floor that said: 'Predators.' Filed in federal court in Charleston, S.C., the lawsuit names as defendants Mace and five unnamed people who are alleged to have conspired with her. The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel, an appointee of former President Obama. The lawsuit will be a major and uncommon test for the Speech and Debate protections given to lawmakers. A press release from Mace's about the speech at the time referenced that protection and defended the veracity of her allegations: 'Any and all statements made by Members on the House Floor are quintessential 'legislative acts,' and protected by the Speech and Debate clause afforded under the Constitution of the United States. Her statements tonight are not conjecture, they are not allegations, they are facts based on information she uncovered and documents she accidentally discovered.' Notably, Musgrave's claims do not focus on Mace's remarks on the House floor, instead taking aim at a prepared version she distributed to the press beforehand, her display of the poster outside her congressional office and a series of social media posts she made on X. 'While the speech and debate clause of the United States Constitution affords broad protection to members of Congress acting as part of its deliberative process, it does not transform the floor of Congress into a sanctuary for defamation, nor does it protect Congresswoman Mace's extra-Congressional defamatory statements surrounding her speech,' the lawsuit states.
