A U.S. Secret Service agent with Vice President Kamala Harris’ detail was removed from their assignment after engaging in a physical fight with other agents while on duty Monday, Fox News Digital has learned. 

The fight was first reported by The New York Post and confirmed to Fox News Digital by a source.

The incident happened at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland while Harris was at the Naval Observatory, but didn’t delay her departure from the base, the Secret Service told Fox News Digital.  

Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications for the U.S. Secret Service, called the incident a “medical matter,” adding that the agency wouldn’t be commenting further. 

RECORDS SHOW BIDEN DOG, COMMANDER, ATTACKED SECRET SERVICE MEMBERS AT LEAST 24 TIMES 

“At approximately 9 a.m. April 22, a U.S. Secret Service special agent supporting the Vice President’s departure from Joint Base Andrews began displaying behavior their colleagues found distressing,” Guglielmi said in a statement shared with Fox News Digital.

TEEN CHARGED IN 2023 BREAK-IN OF SECRET SERVICE SUV PARKED OUTSIDE OF NAOMI BIDEN’S DC HOME

FILE- The chief of communications for the U.S. Secret Service called the incident a “medical matter” after an agent was removed from their assignment following a fight. (SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

He added, “The agent was removed from their assignment while medical personnel were summoned. The Vice President was at the Naval Observatory when this incident occurred and there was no impact on her departure from Joint Base Andrews.

“The U.S. Secret Service takes the safety and health of our employees very seriously. As this was a medical matter, we will not disclose any further details.” 

The agent, who had been acting “erratically,” began punching the special agent in charge after getting on top of him, Real Clear Politics reported. 

Harris wasn’t delayed by the incident, the Secret Service said.  (AP Photo/Meg Kinnard)

The agent, who was handcuffed after the incident and treated by medical staff, had previously been a subject of concern by staff, the outlet reported.

Arizona abortion providers could practice in California under a new law designed to provide care to women who cross the state line as they face newly restrictive prohibitions at home.

The bill introduced Wednesday aims to expedite temporary authorization for those Arizona doctors to practice in both states. It is the latest move by Gov. Gavin Newsom to make California a reproductive health “sanctuary” as abortion seekers in several Republican-led states have lost access to care after the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade in 2022. The bill would also protect the privacy of medical professionals who practice in California.

“We are putting the boxing gloves on to protect women’s rights,” said Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) at a morning news conference. “The state of California has the authority to stand strong for Arizona and their doctors.”

Newsom also attended the news conference alongside members of the women’s caucus and healthcare leaders. The legislation was introduced by Skinner and Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters), the chair and vice chair of the women’s caucus, respectively.

“Arizona law is the first border state law that will directly impact California,” Newsom said. He cited a report that said abortion access in states that border a state that has banned access increased 37% from 2020 to 2023. “This is not an academic exercise. This is real life. This is happening in real time.”

Newsom cited a recent report that found that 160,000 people across this country had to flee their states to access reproductive care last year. An additional 65,000 women who were raped became pregnant in 14 of the most restrictive states, he said.

“We are trying to get ahead of this law which goes into effect on June 8,” Newsom said of the Arizona ban.

The proposal would temporarily allow licensed Arizona doctors to perform abortions and provide related care to Arizona patients traveling to California until the end of November. The Arizona doctors would be under the oversight of California’s Medical Board and Osteopathic Medical Board.

The legislation, which if passed and signed by the governor would go into effect immediately, comes after the Arizona Supreme Court voted this month to impose a near total abortion ban, reinstating a law from 1864 that prohibits abortions except when the woman’s life is at risk.

“Arizona Republicans continue to put women in danger — embracing a draconian law passed when Arizona was a territory, not even a state,” Newsom said in a statement released Wednesday morning. “California will not sit idly by.”

The Arizona House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a proposal to repeal the state’s near-total ban on abortions, though that was just the first step in the legislative process. The Arizona Senate is not expected to take a final vote on the proposal until May.

The governor is working with the state Legislature’s California Women’s Caucus to pass the bill.

California saw a surge in abortions after the Supreme Court reversed Roe, and now clinics are bracing for more after the latest Arizona ruling.

The bill is likely to pass with ease with Newsom’s support but is sure to reignite criticisms from Republican lawmakers who say the Democratic governor — widely viewed as a future presidential candidate — should focus more on California’s crises, including a budget deficit and surging homelessness, and less on out-of-state policies.

The bill joins a litany of abortion measures that Newsom and California’s Democratic supermajority have approved in recent years — not just to enhance care in the Golden State but to provide support to nonresidents facing limited care nationwide.

Last year, Newsom signed a bill into law to allow doctors living under “hostile” laws in states where abortion is banned to receive training in California.

Earlier this week, at a news conference in Modesto, Newsom said abortion access rollbacks have “placed a burden” on California’s healthcare system, especially in Imperial, Riverside and San Diego counties, where clinics have seen an increase in out-of-state patients, including those from Arizona and Texas.

On Sunday, Newsom launched another round of TV advertisements that call out red state antiabortion laws, this time to be aired in Alabama and focusing on proposals that aim to punish women for interstate travel to obtain services.

Even after Nikki Haley dropped out of the Republican presidential primary, effectively handing the party’s nomination to former President Donald J. Trump, nearly 20 percent of G.O.P. primary voters have cast ballots for someone other than Mr. Trump. The Pennsylvania primary on Tuesday, where Ms. Haley won more than 16 percent, was just the latest example.

These anti-Trump votes have been closely watched, particularly in light of the unusually high number of votes for “uncommitted” and candidates other than President Biden in this year’s Democratic primary.

Ballots cast for candidates who have suspended their campaigns are sometimes called zombie votes. This phenomenon is hardly new.

In fact, a review of contested primaries since 2000 reveals that sizable shares of the electorate routinely chose someone other than the eventual nominee, even after all other serious contenders had dropped out.

In 2020, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont withdrew from the Democratic primary on April 8, leaving Joseph R. Biden Jr. as the only serious candidate in the race. Still, in the weeks and months that followed, Mr. Sanders received votes. In the Pennsylvania Democratic primary on June 2, 2020, for example, more than 20 percent of voters chose someone other than Mr. Biden, including 18 percent who selected Mr. Sanders.

The zombie vote in this year’s Republican primary has actually been low by historical standards. In Democratic and Republican primaries going back to 2000, roughly a quarter of voters picked a candidate other than the eventual nominee even after all the other serious contenders had exited the race.

There are many factors that lead to zombie votes. Not all of them indicate a true protest vote from party loyalists against the eventual nominee.

One factor is the rise of early voting and mail ballots. In Florida, for example, around one in three Republican voters had mailed their ballots before Ms. Haley dropped out on March 6.

However, she has continued winning a decent chunk of votes in states where nearly all voting has occurred after her departure. In the Wisconsin election on April 2, Ms. Haley won 13 percent of the vote.

The Trump campaign has argued that some of Ms. Haley’s support has come from Democrats voting in Republican contests. This may explain the zombie vote in, for example, Georgia, where any voter can vote in either presidential primary.

But the pattern has persisted even in states like Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New York where the primaries were open only to registered Republicans.

Unlike protest votes against incumbent presidents in the form of minor candidates and ballots cast for “uncommitted,” contested primaries feature big-name candidates who get wide media exposure, have clear policy differences and forge emotional connections with many voters. Perhaps the affinity some voters develop is the easiest explanation of the persistent zombie vote across so many election cycles.

We shouldn’t expect the zombie vote to go away any time soon. In the past, the share of voters still supporting candidates who had already withdrawn remained relatively consistent, even on the last day of primaries held before the party conventions. And there is no pattern linking the size of the zombie vote to the eventual nominee’s chances of winning or losing in the general election.

For Mr. Trump, what matters is how many of Ms. Haley’s primary voters will rally behind him come November. Polls have shown that her supporters are likely to say they will vote for Mr. Biden. Even so, those same polls often find that many of those voters already supported Mr. Biden in 2020.