NEW: Dem Politician Caught Driving 107 MPH Gives Jaw-Dropping Excuse

A Democratic New Hampshire lawmaker is arguing that a centuries-old provision of the state constitution shielded her from being stopped by police while driving to and from legislative sessions, even after she was accused of speeding well above the limit in two separate cases.

State Rep. Ellen Read is asking the courts to throw out the cases, arguing police unlawfully stopped and detained her because the New Hampshire Constitution protects lawmakers from being “arrested, or held to bail” while attending, traveling to or returning from the General Court.

The first incident occurred in December 2024, when authorities alleged Read was driving more than 100 mph on Interstate 93 in Windham. A second traffic stop followed in June 2025 after she was accused of driving 92 mph in a 65 mph zone in Londonderry.

In both cases, Read said she was driving a vehicle with a New Hampshire state representative license plate and informed officers she was returning from a legislative session.

“At the time of the stop, Ms. Read was a sitting member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives,” her petition states. “She was traveling in a vehicle bearing a New Hampshire State Representative license plate. Upon being stopped, Ms. Read informed the deputy that she was returning from the General Court.”

“The plain reading of the Constitution says that legislators cannot be stopped on their way to or from their duties,” Read told Fox News. “It says nothing of being ticketed or arrested at the end of the commute, and nothing about prosecution.”

“Under the plain language of the New Hampshire Constitution, defendant was unlawfully detained/seized/arrested in violation of her Legislative privilege,” one court motion states. “All evidence illegally obtained should be suppressed, and the charge dismissed.”

HAPPENING NOW: US-Iran Ceasefire Crumbles, War Takes Explosive Turn

At the center of Read’s defense is a provision of the New Hampshire Constitution dating back to 1784 that states, “No member of the House of Representatives, or Senate shall be arrested, or held to bail, on mesne process, during his going to, returning from, or attendance upon, the Court.”

Read said the constitutional language was intended to prevent local officials from delaying lawmakers or interfering with legislative votes, not to give legislators immunity from criminal prosecution.

“It was always the commute itself that was meant to be protected… Not the legislator protected from breaking the law,” she said.

Her petition argues the New Hampshire Supreme Court has never interpreted the scope of the provision in the roughly 240 years since it was ratified, making it a constitutional question the state’s highest court has never directly addressed.

“The question is not whether a sitting legislator is ‘above the law,'” the petition states.

Instead, Read argues lawmakers traveling to and from legislative duties should receive the same “functional analysis” courts apply to police officers or emergency medical technicians who violate traffic laws while performing official duties.

A judge rejected that argument in Read’s first speeding case.

Court records show Read was found guilty of negligent driving in August 2025 and fined $1,240, with half of the fine deferred.

TRENDING: Scott Bessent Unveils $1 Trump Coin Commemorating America’s 250th

She was allowed to keep her driver’s license provided she maintained good behavior for two years, completed a safe-driving course and committed no additional moving violations.

Read later asked the New Hampshire Supreme Court to consider the constitutional issue before her second speeding case moved forward. The court declined, denying her petition without prejudice and allowing her to raise the issue again through a future appeal that complies with court rules.

In a statement posted to Instagram, Read said she accepted the reduced negligent driving charge “to end the case” and chose not to appeal the constitutional question.

The statement also disputed allegations that she exceeded 100 mph, arguing the 2009 Toyota Yaris she was driving, which she said has logged more than 440,000 miles, “simply cannot go that fast.”

Her office further argued the deputy neither used radar nor paced her vehicle, instead estimating her speed while accelerating to catch up. It also said a State House employee who was speaking with Read by phone during the traffic stop later testified to an account that conflicted with the officer’s version of events.

Read’s office also criticized the lack of body-camera footage from the stop and said she now encourages motorists to use dashboard cameras.

Read said her legal challenge is focused on whether the traffic stops themselves were constitutional, not whether she ultimately committed the alleged speeding offenses.

“The unconstitutional manner of the stops, and not the charge, therefore, was the topic of discussion in the case,” she said.

POLL: Will You Support Trump And His Candidates In The Midterms?