Across the country, a new defense is being heard in state and federal courtrooms. From Democratic members of Congress to judges to city council members, officials claim that their duties

include obstructing the official functions of the federal government. It is a type of liberal license that excuses almost any crime in the name of combating what Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz

called the “modern-day Gestapo” of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The latest claimant of this license is Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), who was charged with assaulting, resisting,

and impeding law enforcement officers during a protest at Delaney Hall ICE detention facility in Newark, New Jersey. McIver is shown on video forcing her way into the facility and striking

but she was merely exercising “legislative oversight.” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) declared, “You lay a finger on someone – on Bonnie Watson Coleman or any of the representatives

that were there – you lay a finger on them, we’re going to have a problem.” EXPLORE MORE Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) even ominously warned the federal government that Democrats

would bring down the house if it tried to charge McIver: “It’s a red line. They know better than to go down that road.” Well, the red line was crossed in a big way after Acting US Attorney

for the District of New Jersey Alina Habba charged McIver with a felony under Title 18, United States Code, Section 111(a)(1). The ACLU called the charged “authoritarianism” and insisted

that these state and federal politicians “have every right to exercise their legally authorized oversight responsibilities for expanded immigration detention in New Jersey.” The problem with

the oversight claim is that McIver’s status as a member of Congress does not allow her access to closed federal facilities. Congress can subpoena the executive branch or secure court orders

for access. However, members do not have immunity from criminal laws in unilaterally forcing their way into any federal office or agency. If that were the case, Ocasio-Cortez would not have

posted images of herself crying at the fence of an immigrant facility. She could have climbed over the fence in the name of oversight. Conversely, Republicans in the Biden administration

could have simply pushed their way into the Justice Department to seek the files on the influence-peddling scandal. Yet this same claim is being heard this week from Worcester, Mass., City

Councilor Etel Haxhiaj, who was shown in a video shoving and obstructing ICE officers attempting to arrest a woman on immigration charges. Two other individuals (including a Democratic

candidate for a school board) were arrested, but not Haxhiaj, who claimed she was merely protecting “a constituent.” After the melee, the city manager issued an order preventing city police

from assisting in any way in the carrying out of such civil immigration enforcement efforts by the federal government. Even judges are claiming the same license. In Wisconsin, Judge Hannah

Dugan has been charged with obstructing a federal arrest of an illegal immigrant who appeared in her courtroom. Dugan heard about agents waiting outside in the hallway to arrest the man and

went outside to confront the agents. She told them to speak to the chief judge and that they needed a different warrant. The agents complied, and the chief judge confirmed that they could

conduct the arrest. In the interim, however, Dugan led the man out a non-public door and facilitated his escape. (He was arrested after a chase down a public street.) Dugan also claimed she

was “carrying out her duties,” even though her hearing was over, the charges were not part of a state matter, and the arrest was being carried out outside her courtroom. As Democratic

leaders like Walz engage in rage rhetoric and paint Republicans (and federal law enforcement) as Nazis, political violence is on the rise across the country. Many of the people burning

Teslas claim the same type of license, that the ends justify the means. That includes affluent professionals who are now shoplifting from Whole Foods as a “protest” against Jeff Bezos

meeting with Trump. When the administration sought to investigate those burning Teslas and dealerships, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) denounced it as a “political weaponization” of the legal

system. The comments suggest that such arson is somehow a form of political expression on the left. Jeffries was correct that a “red line” was crossed, but it wasn’t the one he was thinking

of. The red line is the one separating political expression and criminal conduct. _Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the

author of “__The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage__.”_