DOJ Shake-Up Sparks Alarm After New Prosecutor Targets Sitting Congresswoman

What started as a quiet policy proposal inside the Justice Department has exploded into national controversy—raising serious questions about political weaponization, legal oversight, and the future of checks and balances in Washington.

A Quiet Proposal, A Loud Consequence

Late last week, The Washington Post reported that the Trump-era Justice Department is considering a dramatic procedural change: eliminating a key requirement that U.S. Attorneys receive approval from the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section before indicting sitting members of Congress.

If implemented, the shift would allow any individual federal prosecutor—anywhere in the country—to bring charges against lawmakers without oversight from Washington.

Legal experts quickly flagged the move as dangerous, warning it could open the door to politically motivated prosecutions and undermine federal safeguards.

But as of tonight, it may no longer be just a proposal.

Arrests and Accusations in Newark

In a development that’s sent shockwaves through Capitol Hill, Democratic Mayor Ras Baraka of Newark, New Jersey, was arrested two weeks ago during a protest outside an ICE detention center. The arresting officers—masked Homeland Security agents—were described by witnesses as chaotic and unprofessional.

The charge? One count of trespassing.

The move drew immediate scrutiny, especially given that Baraka was participating in a peaceful protest on city property.

Tonight, the story took an even sharper turn.

The U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, newly appointed by President Trump, has now dropped the charge against Baraka—only to replace it with a new, more serious charge against Congresswoman LaMonica McIver, who stood beside him during the protest.

McIver now faces a federal charge of “assaulting, impeding, and interfering with law enforcement” during the same event.

“A Purely Political Attack”

Congresswoman McIver responded swiftly and unequivocally.

“These charges are purely political,” she said in a statement. “They distort my actions, criminalize congressional oversight, and set a dangerous precedent for democracy.”

McIver explained that she and other lawmakers were conducting a lawful, unannounced inspection of conditions at the ICE facility—a practice permitted under federal law.

“We were fulfilling our constitutional responsibility,” she said. “This is nothing short of an attempt to intimidate Congress from doing its job.”

Who Is Behind the Charges?

The federal prosecutor who brought the case is Elena Haba—a former Trump defense attorney best known for representing parking garage companies and making frequent television appearances during Trump’s legal battles.

She now holds the powerful role of U.S. Attorney for New Jersey.

Critics have raised concerns not only about her credentials, but about the timing and tone of her office’s actions. Tonight, MSNBC confirmed that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section was not consulted before the charges against McIver were filed—raising alarm bells that this is precisely the kind of political targeting the oversight body is supposed to prevent.

A Dangerous New Normal?

Civil liberties advocates are sounding the alarm.

“This opens the door to chaos,” said one constitutional lawyer. “If any U.S. Attorney can bring charges against a member of Congress without central oversight, we lose a critical barrier against abuse.”

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers are demanding answers from the DOJ and calling for immediate hearings. Meanwhile, news of the indictment has fueled speculation that more lawmakers—especially those outspoken against immigration enforcement or aligned with progressive causes—could be next.

“This isn’t just about one case,” a Democratic senator said anonymously. “This is about protecting the independence of the legislative branch.”

What Happens Next?

With the charges against McIver now official, the political and legal ramifications are just beginning.

Will the DOJ walk back the policy proposal? Will Congress push back with legislation? Will McIver fight the charges in court—or in the press?

For now, one thing is certain: what began as a bureaucratic memo has become a test case for the boundaries of American democracy in 2025.

And tonight, that test feels very real.