The judge’s state judicial post does not shield her from federal criminal prosecution, the prosecutors argue.
Federal prosecutors are urging a federal court to not throw out the case against Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of obstructing federal immigration officers from doing their job.
In a brief filed on Monday, federal prosecutors asked Judge Lynn Adelman of the Eastern District of Wisconsin to reject Dugan’s motion to dismiss the case based on judicial immunity.
Dugan, 66, was arrested by the FBI on April 25 for allegedly helping conceal Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. FBI Director Kash Patel said at the time that evidence indicates Dugan “intentionally misdirected” federal immigration agents away from Flores-Ruiz, who was to be arrested in her courthouse.
According to an FBI affidavit, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrived at the courthouse on April 18 with an administrative warrant for Flores-Ruiz, who was scheduled to appear before Dugan that day on misdemeanor domestic violence charges. When informed of the agents’ presence, Dugan reportedly became “visibly upset” and insisted that the arrest team needed a judge-signed warrant.
The affidavit alleges that after sending ICE agents to speak with the county’s chief judge, Dugan led Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out of her courtroom through a backdoor intended for jurors. After the man left the courthouse, immigration officers chased him on foot and arrested him at a nearby intersection.
Dugan’s legal team has asked the court to dismiss the charges, arguing that federal officers disrupted her court’s docket and that her conduct is protected under the doctrine of judicial immunity, which generally shields judges from being sued for actions taken in their official capacity.
“This is an extraordinary prosecution that poses a threat to federalism and judicial independence,” defense attorneys wrote in a memo supporting the motion to dismiss.
The prosecutors rebutted those claims in their Monday filing, contending that it was Dugan “who took it upon herself to interfere with the federal agents’ performance of their responsibilities,” not the other way around.
They also cautioned that dismissing the case would dangerously broaden the scope of judicial immunity. Since no duties under Wisconsin law authorized Dugan to help someone evade federal arrest, they argued, her actions fall outside the bounds of protected judicial conduct.
By Bill Pan
