Federal prosecutors present their case Monday against Hannah Dugan, a circuit court judge in Milwaukee, accused of obstruction and concealment for helping Eduardo Flores Ruiz evade ICE agents in April. The trial includes opening statements, questioning of Justice Department witnesses, and defense arguments on judicial immunity. Dugan faces up to six years in prison in the context of President Trump’s immigration crackdown.
READ MORE: DeSantis grants 30 mdd to protect Biscayne Bay
Prosecutors allege that Dugan, angered by ICE’s presence, took Flores Ruiz, a Mexican who re-entered the country illegally in 2013, out the back door after arguing with agents about the validity of the warrant. Flores Ruiz temporarily escaped after a foot chase and faces deportation announced in November. The trial lasts until Thursday with 20 prosecution witnesses; the defense does not specify the duration.
These are the arguments of the prosecution against the judge who defied ICE
FBI affidavit details that public defender alerted Dugan’s secretary about agents in the hallway. Judge calls situation “absurd,” argues with ICE, and directs court president Carl Ashley. Returns to courtroom, instructs Flores Ruiz to accompany her with lawyer, and guides him through public hallway where agents see him but lose track of him.
Department of Homeland Security releases video of incident and labels Dugan an “activist judge.” Kash Patel, director of the FBI, releases photo of her arrest in handcuffs. Republican Tom Tiffany demands jail time, while Democrats see it as an example against judicial opposition to mass deportations.
Defense invokes immunity and judicial protocols
Lawyers argue that Dugan acted in an official capacity without awareness of wrongdoing, enjoying procedural immunity. Carl Ashley sent a policy a week earlier prohibiting arrests in non-public areas and requiring agents to be referred to supervisors, a protocol that Dugan followed. Ashley denied permission for detention in a room or hallway; ICE planned a street arrest.
Federal guidelines issued on January 21 allow operations in courts with prior coordination and minimal impact. The defense questions media coverage via a questionnaire sent to 75 candidates that assesses political bias, stickers, and podcasts. The final jury consists of 12 members and two alternates.
Consequences amplify migratory tensions
Trial marks milestone in confrontation between local courts and Trump’s federal policies. Dugan reports threatening flyers in family homes after incident. Federal government emphasizes arrests in courts despite state protocols.
Defense seeks dismissal by Judge Lynn Adelman, who rejected absolute immunity. Process reveals friction between national security and judicial independence in sanctuary states. Milwaukee faces increased ICE surveillance after incident.
Dugan denies intent to interfere and affirms compliance with local rules. Prosecutors prioritize impact on national immigration operations. Verdict could set precedent for judges in border areas.
