Paul Pelosi faces misdemeanor hit-and-run charge in Napa County
Paul Pelosi, the husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is facing a misdemeanor hit-and-run charge in Napa County following a crash involving his convertible and a parked vehicle. According to the Napa County Sheriff’s Office, Pelosi acknowledged that he had struck something but continued driving until his car became disabled. Deputies said they ruled out DUI at the scene, though the California DMV is expected to reassess Pelosi’s driver’s license after the incident. Pelosi was previously arrested on a DUI charge in 2022.
A Democratic lawmaker in New Hampshire, accused in separate cases of driving more than 100 mph and 92 mph, is arguing that a centuries-old clause in the state constitution shielded her from being stopped while she was traveling to or from a legislative session, according to court filings obtained by INC News.
State Rep. Ellen Read says police acted unlawfully when they pulled her over and detained her, citing language in the New Hampshire Constitution that protects legislators from being “arrested, or held to bail” while attending, going to or returning from the General Court. Her legal argument contends the traffic charges grew out of an unconstitutional stop and should be thrown out.
The first stop occurred in December 2024, when authorities alleged Read was traveling over 100 mph on Interstate 93 in Windham. A second case was filed in June 2025 after officials accused her of driving 92 mph in a 65 mph zone in Londonderry.
New Hampshire state Rep. Ellen Read, shown at a political demonstration in 2015, is asking a court to dismiss two speeding cases by arguing that the state constitution protected her from arrest while traveling to or from a legislative session. (Getty Images)
In both speeding cases, Read said she was behind the wheel of a vehicle displaying a New Hampshire State Representative license plate and told the officers who stopped her that 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.”
Responding to questions from INC News, Read said her position is not that the Constitution gives lawmakers immunity from prosecution. Rather, she said, it protects them from being stopped while they are traveling to or from official legislative duties.
“The plain reading of the Constitution says that legislators cannot be stopped on their way to or from their duties,” Read said. “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 motion states. “All evidence illegally obtained should be suppressed, and the charge dismissed.”
At the center of Read’s defense is a 1784 provision of the New Hampshire Constitution 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 provision was intended to prevent local officials from delaying lawmakers and interfering with legislative votes, not to exempt legislators from criminal liability.
State Capitol of New Hampshire, Concord (Photo by: Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Universal Images Group via Getty Images) (Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
“It was always the commute itself that was meant to be protected… Not the legislator protected from breaking the law,” she said.
Read’s petition argues the New Hampshire Supreme Court has never interpreted the scope of the provision in the roughly 240 years since it was ratified, calling it a constitutional question of first impression that the state’s highest court has never squarely 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” applied 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 she was found guilty of negligent driving in August 2025 and fined $1,240, with half the fine deferred.
She was also allowed to keep her license as long as she maintained good behavior for two years, completed a safe-driving course and avoided additional moving violations.
Read later asked the New Hampshire Supreme Court to take up the constitutional question before the second speeding case proceeded. The court declined, denying her petition without prejudice and allowing her to raise the arguments again in a future appeal that complies with court rules.
Read defended her handling of the case in an Instagram statement, saying she accepted the reduced negligent driving charge “to end the case” and did not appeal the constitutional issue.
In the same statement, Read’s office disputed allegations that she exceeded 100 mph, arguing the 2009 Toyota Yaris she was driving, which she said has more than 440,000 miles on it, “simply cannot go that fast.”
Her office also said the officer did not use radar or clock her speed and instead estimated it while accelerating to catch up to her vehicle. Read’s office further claimed a State House employee who was on the phone with her 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 challenge focuses on the legality of the traffic stops rather than the underlying charges.
“The unconstitutional manner of the stops, and not the charge, therefore, was the topic of discussion in the case,” she said.
