Protesters gather outside of the Milwaukee FBI office to speak out against the arrest of Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Prosecutors for the Trump administration filed a brief Monday requesting that a federal judge not dismiss the government’s indictment against Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan.
Dugan faces criminal charges after Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, along with agents from the Drug Enforcement Agency and FBI, arrived in the Milwaukee County Courthouse April 18 to arrest 31-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz for being in the country illegally.
Flores-Ruiz was set to appear in Dugan’s courtroom that day for a status hearing on misdemeanor charges against him. When Dugan learned that the agents were outside her courtroom, she confronted them and learned they only had an administrative warrant, which was issued by an agency official and not a judge. An administrative warrant doesn’t allow agents to enter private spaces in the courthouse such as Dugan’s courtroom.
Later, while the agents were waiting for Flores-Ruiz in the hallway outside the main courtroom door, Dugan sent him and his attorney out a side door into the hallway. One of the agents rode down the elevator with Flores-Ruiz and he was later arrested on the street.
Dugan was charged with concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor, and obstruction, which is a felony. Last month, Dugan’s attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case against her, arguing she was acting in her official capacity as a judge and therefore immune from prosecution for her actions and that the federal government is impinging on the state of Wisconsin’s authority to operate its court system.
The case drew national attention, with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and FBI Director Kash Patel both making public statements about Dugan’s arrest before she’d even been indicted. Legal experts have questioned the strength of the federal government’s case and accused Trump officials of grandstanding to make a political point.
In the Monday filing, federal prosecutors argued that dismissing the case would ignore previously established law that allows judges to face criminal charges.
“Such a ruling would give state court judges carte blanche to interfere with valid law enforcement actions by federal agents in public hallways of a courthouse, and perhaps even beyond,” the prosecutors argued. “Dugan’s desired ruling would, in essence, say that judges are ‘above the law,’ and uniquely entitled to interfere with federal law enforcement.”
Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, left, leaves the federal courthouse after a hearing Thursday, May 15, 2025, in Milwaukee. (Andy Manis / Associated Press)
A Wisconsin judge pleaded not guilty Thursday to charges accusing her of helping a man who is illegally in the country evade U.S. immigration authorities seeking to arrest him in her courthouse.
Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan entered the plea during a brief arraignment in federal court. Magistrate Judge Stephen Dries scheduled a trial to begin July 21. Dugan’s lead attorney, Steven Biskupic, told the judge that he expects the trial to last a week.
Dugan, her lawyers and prosecutors left the hearing without speaking to reporters.
She is charged with concealing an individual to prevent arrest and obstruction. Prosecutors say she escorted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer out of her courtroom through a back door on April 18 after learning that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were in the courthouse seeking to arrest him for being in the country illegally. She could face up to six years in prison if convicted on both counts.
Her attorneys say she’s innocent. They filed a motion Wednesday to dismiss the case, saying she was acting in her official capacity as a judge and therefore is immune to prosecution. They also maintain that the federal government violated Wisconsin’s sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge.
A public backlash
Dugan’s arrest has inflamed tensions between the Trump administration and Democrats over the president’s sweeping immigration crackdown.
Dozens of demonstrators gathered outside the courthouse ahead of Thursday’s hearing, with some holding signs that read “Only Fascists Arrest Judges — Drop the Charges,” “Department of Justice Over-Reach” and “Keep Your Hands Off Our Judges!!” The crowd chanted “Due process rights,” “Hands off our freedom,” and “Si se puede” — Spanish for “Yes, we can” — which is a rallying cry for immigrant rights advocates.
One man stood alone across the street holding a Trump flag.
Supporters of Judge Hannah Dugan protest outside the United States Federal Building and Courthouse in Milwaukee on Thursday, May 15, 2025, ahead of Dugan’s arraignment on charges that she helped a man in the country illegally evade arrest by immigration authorities. (Todd Richmond / Associated Press)
Nancy Camden, from suburban Mequon north of Milwaukee, was among the protesters calling for the case to be dismissed. She said she believes ICE shouldn’t have tried to arrest Flores-Ruiz inside the courthouse and the Department of Justice “overreached” in charging Dugan.
“How they handled this and made a big show of arresting her and putting her in handcuffs, all of that was intimidation,” Camden said. “And I’m not going to be intimidated. I’m fighting back.”
Esther Cabrera, an organizer with the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, said the charges against Dugan amount to “state-funded repression.”
“If we are going to go after judges, if we’re going to go after mayors, we have to understand that they can come after anybody,” she said. “And that’s kind of why we wanted to make a presence out here today is to say that you can’t come after everyone and it stops here.”
According to court documents, Flores-Ruiz illegally reentered the U.S. after being deported in 2013. Online court records show he was charged with three counts of misdemeanor domestic abuse in Milwaukee County in March, and he was in Dugan’s courtroom on April 18 for a hearing in that case.
According to an FBI affidavit, Dugan was alerted to the agents’ presence by her clerk, who was informed by an attorney that the agents appeared to be in the hallway. Dugan was visibly angry and called the situation “absurd” before leaving the bench and retreating to her chambers, the affidavit contends. She and another judge later approached members of the arrest team in the courthouse with what witnesses described as a “confrontational, angry demeanor.”
After a back-and-forth with the agents over the warrant for Flores-Ruiz, Dugan demanded they speak with the chief judge and led them from the courtroom, according to the affidavit.
After she returned to the courtroom, witnesses heard her say something to the effect of “wait, come with me” before ushering Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out through a door typically used only by deputies, jurors, court staff and in-custody defendants, the affidavit alleges. Flores-Ruiz was free on a signature bond in the abuse case, according to online state court records. Federal agents ultimately detained him outside the courthouse after a foot chase.
The state Supreme Court suspended Dugan last week, saying the move was necessary to preserve public confidence in the judiciary. She was freed after her arrest.
How the case might play out
John Vaudreuil, a former federal prosecutor in Wisconsin who isn’t involved in Dugan’s or Flores-Ruiz’s cases, said the Trump administration seems to want to make an example out of Dugan. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi or Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, rather than the U.S. attorney in Milwaukee, are likely making the decisions on how to proceed, making it less likely prosecutors will reduce the charges against Dugan in a deal, he said.
Her attorneys will likely try to push for a jury trial, Vaudreuil predicted, because they know that “people feel very strongly about the way the president and administration is conducting immigration policy.”
Dugan is represented by some of Wisconsin’s most accomplished lawyers. Biskupic was a federal prosecutor for 20 years and served seven years as U.S. attorney in Milwaukee. Paul Clement, meanwhile, is a former U.S. solicitor general who has argued more than 100 cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. Both were appointed to jobs by former Republican President George W. Bush.
Associated Press reporters Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, and Laura Bargfeld contributed to this report.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup.This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.
Protesters gather to support Judge Hannah Dugan. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Judge Hannah Dugan appeared at her arraignment Thursday in Milwaukee’s federal court and pleaded not guilty to charges that she helped a man elude federal agents in the Milwaukee County courthouse earlier this year.
Dugan was arrested in April and was indicted Tuesday by a grand jury on two counts, concealing a person from arrest and obstruction of proceedings. The charges could carry penalties of six years of prison, years of supervision, and at least $350,000 in fines.
The Wisconsin Examiner’s Criminal Justice Reporting Project shines a light on incarceration, law enforcement and criminal justice issues with support from the Public Welfare Foundation.
Dugan appeared with three attorneys, and did not comment to reporters after the hearing was over. Attorneys mentioned in court that a small number of video excerpts have been shared with the defense, but discovery is still ongoing.
Judge Lynn Adelman has been assigned to preside over Dugan’s jury trial, which was set to start on July 21, with a pretrial hearing July 9. Jury selection is expected to be lengthy and complicated. A motions hearing was set in Judge Nancy Joseph’s court on May 30.
Dugan is accused of escorting a man into a public hallway with access to elevators after federal agents arrived outside her courtroom, where the man, a Mexican immigrant, was having a routine hearing in a misdemeanor battery case.
The agents had an administrative warrant for his arrest, which was not signed by a judge and did not give agents the authority to enter the courtroom. While the agents waited in the hallway outside, Dugan directed the man and his attorney out a side door that exited into the same hallway. The agents saw him leave the room and one rode down the elevator with him before he was arrested later on the street.
Outside the Milwaukee federal courthouse on Thursday, a crowd of about 200 people gathered, including elected officials, activists and local residents showed up early in the morning to support the circuit court judge. Speakers led chants through a microphone on the courthouse steps.
One person at the rally, Erik Fanning, said that the charges against Dugan feel “preposterous,” and argued that a judge would be knowledgeable about what the law would and would not allow her to do in courtroom situations.
Protesters gather to support Judge Hannah Dugan. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
“As many people in this country have found out, the law can be manipulated in order to serve an interest that’s sometimes more powerful than the law, as we’re seeing right now in this country,” Fanning told Wisconsin Examiner. “And so that’s the fear here with me.”
After her arrest, Dugan was suspended by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and protests erupted in Milwaukee County calling for the charges against her to be dropped.
If the case against Dugan succeeds, “That’s a powerful statement,” Fanning said. “That’s a powerful move in this game that they’re playing with our justice system.”
Shortly after Dugan’s arrest, FBI Director Kash Patel posted on social media praising her detention, then deleted the post.
For Fanning, Dugan’s arrest felt like a “made-for-TV” moment created by the Trump administration. More press attention on Dugan’s arrest and trial validates his own instincts that “this is a watershed moment,” he said.
“The media should be interested, because it’s a frightening, very important moment,” Fanning said. “Remember who this administration’s leader is. It’s a TV guy. It’s a manipulating the press, and propaganda guy…So everything they do is a TV show.”
The Milwaukee County Courthouse (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Attorneys for Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan filed a motion to dismiss the federal charges against her on Wednesday, arguing the government can’t charge her because she has judicial immunity.
“This is no ordinary criminal case, and Dugan is no ordinary criminal defendant,” the motion states. “Dugan is a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge. She was arrested and indicted for actions allegedly taken in and in the immediate vicinity of her courtroom, involving a person appearing before her as a party. The government’s prosecution of Judge Dugan is virtually unprecedented and entirely unconstitutional — it violates the Tenth Amendment and fundamental principles of federalism and comity reflected in that amendment and in the very structure of the United States Constitution.”
The motion states that the problems with the prosecution “are legion,” and begin with her judicial immunity, which prevents judges from being charged with crimes for their official acts. Immunity is not a defense to be used at trial but “is an absolute bar to the prosecution at the outset,” the motion states, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States that found the president can’t be charged with crimes for official acts.
Dugan has been accused by federal officials of helping an immigrant without legal status in the U.S. escape from federal agents waiting to arrest him outside her courtroom last month. The criminal complaint alleges she directed the man, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who came to her court for a routine hearing in a misdemeanor case, out a side door to avoid federal agents waiting to arrest him with an administrative warrant. Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer exited the courtroom into the same hallway where the agents were waiting and a DEA agent rode down the elevator with him before he was arrested on the street.
Trump administration officials have touted the case as an example of a stern federal response to “deranged” judges across the country working to stymie the president’s efforts to increase immigration enforcement.
Dugan’s motion states the facts alleged in the indictment and criminal complaint against her would be disproven at trial, but that the case should never get that far.
“Even if (contrary to what the trial evidence would show) Judge Dugan took the actions the complaint alleges, these plainly were judicial acts for which she has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution,” the motion states. “Judges are empowered to maintain control over their courtrooms specifically and the courthouse generally.”
Dugan’s attorneys also argue that the prosecution violates the Tenth Amendment, which clarifies the balance of power between states and the federal government. The motion states that federal agents going into a state courthouse to arrest a sitting judge is a violation of the Constitution.
“The government’s prosecution here reaches directly into a state courthouse, disrupting active proceedings, and interferes with the official duties of an elected judge,” the motion states. “The federal government violated Wisconsin’s sovereignty on April 18 when it disrupted Judge Dugan’s courtroom, and it is violating Wisconsin’s sovereignty now with this prosecution. The Court should end the violation of Wisconsin’s sovereignty and dismiss the indictment.”
Dugan is scheduled to appear in court for her arraignment Thursday morning.
A federal grand jury on Tuesday indicted a Wisconsin judge accused of helping a man evade immigration authorities, allowing the case against her to continue.
The arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan escalated a clash between President Donald Trump’s administration and local authorities over the Republican’s sweeping immigration crackdown. Democrats have accused the Trump administration of trying to make a national example of Dugan to chill judicial opposition to the crackdown.
Prosecutors charged Dugan in April via complaint with concealing an individual to prevent arrest and obstruction. In the federal criminal justice system, prosecutors can initiate charges against a defendant directly by filing a complaint or present evidence to a grand jury and let that body decide whether to issue charges.
A grand jury still reviews charges brought by complaint to determine whether enough probable cause exists to continue the case as a check on prosecutors’ power. If the grand jury determines there’s probable cause, it issues a written statement of the charges known as an indictment. That’s what happened in Dugan’s case.
Her team of defense attorneys responded to the indictment with a one-sentence statement saying that she maintains her innocence and looks forward to being vindicated in court.
Dugan was scheduled to enter a plea on Thursday.
No one immediately returned a voicemail left at the U.S. attorney’s office in Milwaukee seeking comment on the indictment.
Dugan’s case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of helping a man sneak out a courthouse back door to evade a waiting immigration enforcement agent. That case was eventually dismissed.
Prosecutors say Dugan escorted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer out of her courtroom through a back jury door on April 18 after learning that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were in the courthouse seeking his arrest.
According to court documents, Flores-Ruiz illegally reentered the U.S. after being deported in 2013. Online state court records show he was charged with three counts of misdemeanor domestic abuse in Milwaukee County in March. He was in Dugan’s courtroom that morning of April 18 for a hearing.
Court documents suggest Dugan was alerted to the agents’ presence by her clerk, who was informed by an attorney that the agents appeared to be in the hallway. An affidavit says Dugan was visibly angry over the agents’ arrival and called the situation “absurd” before leaving the bench and retreating to her chambers. She and another judge later approached members of the arrest team in the courthouse with what witnesses described as a “confrontational, angry demeanor.”
After a back-and-forth with the agents over the warrant for Flores-Ruiz, Dugan demanded they speak with the chief judge and led them away from the courtroom, according to the affidavit.
She then returned to the courtroom and was heard saying words to the effect of “wait, come with me” and ushered Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out through a back jury door typically used only by deputies, jurors, court staff and in-custody defendants, according to the affidavit. Flores-Ruiz was free on a signature bond in the abuse case at the time, according to online state court records.
Federal agents ultimately captured him outside the courthouse after a foot chase.
The state Supreme Court suspended Dugan from the bench in late April, saying the move was necessary to preserve public confidence in the judiciary. A reserve judge is filling in for her.
Protesters gather outside of the Milwaukee FBI office to speak out against the arrest of Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on charges of concealing a person from arrest and obstruction of proceedings.
Dugan has been accused by federal officials of helping an undocumented immigrant escape from federal agents waiting to arrest him outside of her courtroom last month.
The case has been cited by officials in the administration of President Donald Trump as an example of “deranged” judges working to stymie the administration’s increased immigration enforcement. Critics, including 150 judges of both political parties who wrote a letter to the Department of Justice objecting to Dugan’s arrest, have said the charges against a sitting state judge mark an escalation by the Trump administration trying to make a political point in a weak case to attack the judiciary.
Tuesday’s indictment is a normal procedural step in a criminal case but attorneys said after Dugan’s arrest late last month that it was strange that federal prosecutors hadn’t gotten a grand jury indictment prior to bringing the charges against her. Instead, U.S. attorneys filed a criminal complaint, which publicized the case immediately and allowed Dugan’s attorneys to learn the allegations against her.
The charges stem from a routine court appearance in April by Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a 30-year-old Mexican immigrant accused of misdemeanor battery. While he was in the courtroom, agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the FBI and DEA arrived with an administrative warrant to arrest Flores-Ruiz.
That warrant, which was not signed by a judge, did not give agents the authority to enter the courtroom. The agents waited in the hallway outside. Dugan directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a side door of the room that exited into the same hallway. The agents saw him leave the room and one rode down the elevator with him before he was arrested later on the street.
Dugan has been temporarily removed from her seat on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court by the Wisconsin Supreme Court while the charges are pending, but after the indictment, her attorneys said in a statement she’ll fight the charges.
“Judge Dugan asserts her innocence and looks forward to being vindicated in court.”
Dugan is scheduled to appear in court on Thursday morning.
The recent arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan – who is accused of obstructing a federal immigration arrest inside the Milwaukee County Courthouse – has intensified concerns over immigration enforcement and sparked questions about what rights individuals have when encountering federal agents.
Here’s what to know.
What is obstruction?
Obstruction occurs when a person prevents or makes it more difficult for officers to perform their duty – a definition that covers a broad range of actions, said Benjamin Van Severen, a Milwaukee-based criminal defense attorney and founder of Van Severen Law Office.
Obstruction can include physically interfering with an arrest, such as refusing to comply during a traffic stop.
“Let’s say you’re in a vehicle, and law enforcement does a traffic stop and then you refuse to unlock the doors – that could be obstruction,” said Van Severen.
Obstruction also includes providing false information to law enforcement.
According to the criminal complaint, Dugan obstructed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents by escorting the individual they intended to arrest into a nonpublic area of the courthouse after requesting the agents go to the chief judge.
A related but distinct offense from obstruction is known as harboring.
Harboring generally refers to knowingly assisting someone to remain in the United States unlawfully – typically by hiding, transporting or supporting the person in order to help avoid detention.
Knowledge and intent are critical components of the charge.
“You have to be acting with the conscious purpose of aiding their intention to remain here illegally,” said Ronald Kuby, a civil rights attorney familiar with similar cases.
“If, let’s say, Ahmed says to his neighbor, ‘Look, I need $150 to get a bus ticket to go to Canada because ICE is going to arrest me,’ it’s perfectly fine to give Ahmed that 150 bucks to go to Canada,” he said. “He may not buy that bus ticket to Canada. He may buy a bus ticket to, you know, Indianapolis, but that’s not on you.”
Different types of warrants
Understanding the difference between types of warrants is crucial in understanding immigration enforcement, particularly when it comes to where these warrants permit officers to go.
An administrative warrant permits immigration officers to arrest someone in a public place, such as a sidewalk or bus station. However, it does not allow entry into a private residence without consent.
Judicial warrants, by contrast, are signed by a judge and can authorize arrests in both public and private spaces.
Despite the differences, both administrative and judicial warrants are lawful tools that permit arrests in immigration cases, Van Severen said.
However, there are different rights that can be asserted depending on the type of warrant.
If law enforcement presents an administrative warrant, people inside a private residence have the right to refuse entry.
“If it’s not signed by a judge, they can’t come into your home without permission,” said R. Timothy Muth, staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, of Wisconsin. “Ask to see the warrant. Have them slip it under the door or show it to you at your window. Look at the signature line – does it say ‘magistrate judge’?”
Other rights
Regardless of citizenship status, everyone in the U.S. has certain constitutional protections, including the right to remain silent and to speak to an attorney.
However, if the arrest is for an immigration violation and not a criminal offense, the government does not have to provide a lawyer, explained Ruby De León, staff attorney at Voces de la Frontera, an immigrant advocacy organization in Milwaukee.
Documenting activities related to immigration enforcement, such as filming and noting names and badge numbers, is also legal so long as it does not interfere with law enforcement actions, said Muth.
If people are not citizens but have documentation that permits them to stay in the country – such as a green card – they are required to keep that documentation with them, Muth said.
Muth recommends carrying documentation showing continuous presence in the country for more than two years, such as a lease agreement, pay stubs or utility bill in the person’s name.
Individuals who cannot prove they’ve been physically present in the U.S. for at least two years may be subject to expedited removal – a process that allows the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, to deport someone without a hearing before an immigration judge.
Advocates recommend ensuring documentation is current, applying for passports for U.S.-born children and pursuing citizenship or legal status if eligible, perhaps through an employer or family member.
Voces suggests completing power-of-attorney forms to prepare for potential family separation. If a person is detained or deported, these forms allow a designated individual to make medical, financial or child care decisions on the person’s behalf.
Forward Latino, a nonprofit organization that advocates for the civil rights of Latinos throughout the country, has created a tool kit regarding potential family separation.
Other resources
A city of Milwaukee municipal ID can serve as a form of identification for city residents who cannot get state identification.
Voces maintains a list of immigration, workers’ rights and family attorneys it deems trustworthy.
Voces also provides various workshops and clinics, including Know Your Rights training, citizenship classes and legal clinics. For citizenship classes, call (414) 236-0415 or email newamerican@vdlf.org. For other services or questions, call (414) 643-1620.
Wisconsin’s constitution gives the Legislature two methods for removing judges from office.
Impeachment starts with a majority Assembly vote based on “corrupt conduct in office” or commission of a crime. A two-thirds Senate vote following a Senate trial would result in removal.
“Removal by address” occurs through a two-thirds vote of each chamber, based on misconduct. The judge would have an opportunity to make a defense.
Wisconsin judges run in nonpartisan elections. Bothchambers of the Legislature have a simple Republican majority.
Republicans called for the Legislature to remove Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan after the FBI arrested her April 24. She is charged with two crimes for allegedly obstructing Immigration and Customs Enforcement from arresting a criminal defendant in her courtroom.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court temporarily suspended Dugan. The Supreme Court can also remove judges for misconduct, based on a state Judicial Commission investigation.
On Thursday, President Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate ActBlue, the Democratic Party-aligned fundraising site that has fueled so many successful challenges against his own party.
The next day, amid a long-running feud with judges who have put some of his initiatives on hold because they may violate the Constitution, Trump’s FBI arrested a Milwaukee judge, alleging she had helped a migrant evade immigration authorities.
The two acts sent shockwaves through the legal and political worlds, which already have been reeling as Trump has used his office to target law firms, media outlets and individuals with whom he disagrees. The investigations are the latest version of a clear pattern in Trump’s second term: The president has harnessed the power of the federal government to punish his enemies and anyone he sees as standing in his way.
“This government has been consistent, from the moment it took office, in weaponizing the government and deploying it against critics,” said Steve Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and the coauthor of “How Democracies Die.” “This is not a surprise. Trump campaigned on it and he’s been doing it since day one.”
The complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday accused Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan of ushering the man, who is accused of being in the country illegally, out the “jury door” of her courtroom. The complaint alleges the judge became “visibly angry” when told there were immigration agents in the courthouse.
Her arrest Friday morning was announced in a post on X by Trump’s FBI director, Kash Patel, a Trump loyalist who before the election had compiled an “enemies list” to target during the president’s second term. Patel later deleted the post.
Shortly after Dugan’s arrest, a few dozen protesters marched outside the courthouse, chanting, “Judge Dugan will be free, no justice, no peace.” Democrats across the country were alarmed.
“There are no kings in America,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said. He called the arrest “a dangerous escalation, an attack on the separation of powers, and we will fight this with everything we have.”
On Saturday, protesters chanted “Immigrants are here to stay” and held up signs saying, “Liberty and Justice for All” as they marched outside the FBI’s Milwaukee division.
“The judiciary acts as a check to unchecked executive power. And functioning democracies do not lock up judges,” Democratic state Rep. Ryan Clancy told the crowd.
During an appearance on Fox News after the arrest, Attorney General Pam Bondi sent a warning to judges across the country. She was addressing the case of Dugan and a retired New Mexico judge, whom the administration also is targeting for allegedly harboring someone in the country illegally. But her words carried extra weight given the administration’s feuds with federal judges who have ruled against them in lawsuits challenging the administration’s actions and executive orders.
“Some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law and they are not, and we’re sending a very strong message today,” Bondi said.
Hours later, she revoked a Biden administration policy protecting journalists from having their records seized in leak investigations.
Trump himself lambasted judges Friday as he flew to Pope Francis’ funeral in Rome, frustrated that they were stalling his deportation plans.
“These are judges who just want to show how big and important they are,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One. “They shouldn’t be allowed to do it. We have hundreds of thousands of people we want to get out of the country, and the courts are holding us back.”
The White House has mocked on social media an order, upheld unanimously at the U.S. Supreme Court, from a federal judge that it “facilitate” the return of a Maryland man it admitted mistakenly deporting to a notorious prison in El Salvador. It mocked another federal judge who ordered planes full of immigrants turned around before they reached El Salvador. In another case, it acknowledged deporting additional migrants despite an order against it, arguing that the judge only forbade immigration authorities — and not the military — from removing the men from the country.
Trump’s allies in Congress and online have urged that judges be impeached if they have ruled against his other initiatives to cut the federal government or unilaterally change elections, or even to ignore orders outright. With the Republican-controlled Congress silent as Trump tries to remake the federal government, the courts have emerged as the only branch of government that is actively challenging the president.
Trump also moved to kneecap one other force challenging him by targeting ActBlue. The website funnels small-dollar donations to predominantly Democratic candidates and has become a powerhouse in helping Democrats stay ahead of Republicans financially in many elections. The GOP set up a site to mimic it called WinRed, but Trump’s order only directs a probe into the Democratic site, not the one run by his own party.
Trump asked Bondi to see if ActBlue was a potential conduit for illegal overseas donations. The site said it followed the law, and it and Democrats condemned the probe as politically motivated.
Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College, said Trump’s targeting of Democratic Party infrastructure fits a pattern of many authoritarians around the world, who use government power to cripple opposition parties so they can no longer win elections.
“We’re well past Watergate,” he said, referring to the 1972 scandal that led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation two years later. “The investigation of ActBlue makes clear that we’re not in a fully democratic country.”
“In a democracy,” Nyhan said, “opposition parties don’t have to fight uphill.”
Associated Press writer Lisa Mascaro in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report, originally published April 25. Details reported by AP from an April 26 protest were added.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup.This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.
The FBI on Friday arrested a Milwaukee judge accused of helping a man evade immigration authorities, escalating a clash between the Trump administration and local authorities over the Republican president’s sweeping immigration crackdown.
Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan is accused of escorting the man and his lawyer out of her courtroom through the jury door last week after learning that immigration authorities were seeking his arrest. The man was taken into custody outside the courthouse after agents chased him on foot.
President Donald Trump’s administration has accused state and local officials of interfering with his immigration enforcement priorities. The arrest also comes amid a growing battle between the administration and the federal judiciary over the president’s executive actions over deportations and other matters.
Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, in a statement on the arrest, accused the Trump administration of repeatedly using “dangerous rhetoric to attack and attempt to undermine our judiciary at every level.”
“I have deep respect for the rule of law, our nation’s judiciary, the importance of judges making decisions impartially without fear or favor, and the efforts of law enforcement to hold people accountable if they commit a crime,” Evers said. “I will continue to put my faith in our justice system as this situation plays out in the court of law.”
Dugan was taken into custody by the FBI on Friday morning on the courthouse grounds, according to U.S. Marshals Service spokesperson Brady McCarron. She appeared briefly in federal court in Milwaukee later Friday before being released from custody. She faces charges of “concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest” and obstructing or impeding a proceeding.
“Judge Dugan wholeheartedly regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public safety,” her attorney, Craig Mastantuono, said during the hearing. He declined to comment to an Associated Press reporter following her court appearance.
Court papers suggest Dugan was alerted to the presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in the courthouse by her clerk, who was informed by an attorney that they appeared to be in the hallway.
The FBI affidavit describes Dugan as “visibly angry” over the arrival of immigration agents in the courthouse and says that she pronounced the situation “absurd” before leaving the bench and retreating to her chambers. It says she and another judge later approached members of the arrest team inside the courthouse, displaying what witnesses described as a “confrontational, angry demeanor.”
After a back-and-forth with officers over the warrant for the man, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, she demanded that the arrest team speak with the chief judge and led them away from the courtroom, the affidavit says.
After directing the arrest team to the chief judge’s office, investigators say, Dugan returned to the courtroom and was heard saying words to the effect of “wait, come with me” before ushering Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer through a jury door into a non-public area of the courthouse. The action was unusual, the affidavit says, because “only deputies, juries, court staff, and in-custody defendants being escorted by deputies used the back jury door. Defense attorneys and defendants who were not in custody never used the jury door.”
A sign that remained posted on Dugan’s courtroom door Friday advised that if any attorney or other court official “knows or believes that a person feels unsafe coming to the courthouse to courtroom 615,” they should notify the clerk and request an appearance via Zoom.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said the man was facing domestic violence charges and victims were sitting in the courtroom with state prosecutors when the judge helped him escape immigration arrest.
The judge “put the lives of our law enforcement officers at risk. She put the lives of citizens at risk. A street chase — it’s absurd that that had to happen,” Bondi said on Fox News Channel.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat who represents Wisconsin, called the arrest of a sitting judge a “gravely serious and drastic move” that “threatens to breach” the separation of power between the executive and judicial branches.
“Make no mistake, we do not have kings in this country and we are a Democracy governed by laws that everyone must abide by,” Baldwin said in an emailed statement. “By relentlessly attacking the judicial system, flouting court orders, and arresting a sitting judge, this President is putting those basic Democratic values that Wisconsinites hold dear on the line.”
The case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of helping a man sneak out a back door of a courthouse to evade a waiting immigration enforcement agent.
That prosecution sparked outrage from many in the legal community, who slammed the case as politically motivated. Prosecutors dropped the case against Newton District Judge Shelley Joseph in 2022 under the Democratic Biden administration after she agreed to refer herself to a state agency that investigates allegations of misconduct by members of the bench.
The Justice Department had previously signaled that it was going to crack down on local officials who thwart federal immigration efforts.
The department in January ordered prosecutors to investigate for potential criminal charges any state and local officials who obstruct or impede federal functions. As potential avenues for prosecution, a memo cited a conspiracy offense as well as a law prohibiting the harboring of people in the country illegally.
Dugan was elected in 2016 to the county court Branch 31. She also has served in the court’s probate and civil divisions, according to her judicial candidate biography.
Before being elected to public office, Dugan practiced at Legal Action of Wisconsin and the Legal Aid Society. She graduated from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1981 with a bachelor of arts degree and earned her Juris Doctorate in 1987 from the school.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup.This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.
Login
