The Milwaukee County Courthouse (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Update: ICE spokespeople directed Wisconsin Examiner to a post made on X (formerly known as Twitter) announcing the arrest of Kevin Lopez, 36, a Mexican citizen, who the post said is facing state charges of sexual assault of a minor, and sexual assault of an unconscious victim. The post states that Lopez had been previously arrested by local authorities for cannabis possession. Online court records confirm the charges against Lopez.

Another Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrest was made at the Milwaukee County Courthouse on May 7. Chief Judge Carl Ashley said he was told the arrest occurred after a court hearing. Since March, at least four people have been arrested for immigration enforcement in or near the courthouse. Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was charged with obstruction after escorting a man sought by ICE into a public hallway outside her courtroom. 

The identity of the person arrested Wednesday has not been released. ICE officials have been unable to provide information at this time to Wisconsin Examiner.

In late March, Marco Cruz-Garcia, 24, a Mexican citizen, was arrested in the courthouse as he appeared in family court on a domestic violence restraining order. In a statement, ICE accused Cruz-Garcia of being a known member of the “Sureños transnational criminal street gang,” and cited his 2020 deportation order by a judge.  

Edwin Bustamante-Sierre, 27, a Nicaraguan citizen, was arrested days after Cruz-Garcia on April 3. ICE said in a statement that Bustamante-Sierre had been charged with reckless driving, endangering safety, reckless use of a firearm, use of a dangerous weapon and cocaine possession in Fond du Lac County and Milwaukee County.

On April 18, agents arrested Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 30, a Mexican immigrant lacking permanent legal status, who faced three misdemeanor domestic battery charges. 

The arrest of Flores-Ruiz led to Judge Dugan’s arrest. On April 25, Dugan was arrested outside the courthouse, with agents leading the judge to an unmarked squad car in handcuffs. Protests erupted that day and over the weekend at the FBI Milwaukee office, which conducted a speedy investigation into Dugan, after right-wing media outlets claimed to have broken a story about Dugan helping the man evade ICE by leading him out a side door in  her courtroom.

A bipartisan letter from judges around the country objected to the unusual, high-profile arrest and “perp walk” of Dugan. 

Local officials in Milwaukee have spoken out against the ICE arrests at the courthouse, saying they are disrupting proceedings as community members seek crucial services and are discouraging people from coming to court.

Main Street in the Wisconsin community of Cambridge. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

As a former small business owner for 27 years and a longtime board member of the Monroe Street Merchants Association in Madison, I’ve spent decades working to strengthen the small businesses and Main Streets that make our communities thrive. Today, I’m deeply concerned — because Main Streets across America are under threat like never before.

The sweeping tariffs imposed by the current administration are already fueling inflation, disrupting supply chains, and pushing small businesses to the brink. Local retailers, independent producers and small manufacturers — the very backbone of our neighborhoods — are being hit hardest.

Carol “Orange” Schroeder, our board chair at the Monroe Street Merchants Association and owner of Orange Tree Imports, a favorite Madison store, understands this better than most. This year, Orange is celebrating 50 years in business — an incredible milestone. Over the decades, she’s helped independent retailers nationwide weather many challenges, including fierce online competition. But as she recently wrote, not even the pandemic has matched the level of economic turmoil small businesses are facing today.

The problem is clear and devastating: suppliers can’t get the goods they need, vendors are questioning whether they can stay afloat and customers — grappling with rising prices and financial anxiety — are pulling back from shopping locally. Sales reps are going unpaid as orders are canceled, and stores of all sizes are bracing for empty shelves. In short, the social fabric that binds our communities is beginning to fray under the weight of uncertainty.

The National Retail Federation recently warned that these tariffs threaten the American dream — and they’re right. Small businesses aren’t just part of our economy; they’re central to our national identity, job creation, innovation and the strength of our local communities.

Now more than ever, Congress must step up and act. Policymakers have a critical opportunity to end these harmful tariffs, restore stability, and reassert balance in our trade policies. Just as importantly, Congress must reassert its constitutional authority over the power of the purse — a responsibility that rests with the legislative branch, not the executive alone.

The stakes couldn’t be clearer. Without immediate action, we face shuttered storefronts, lost jobs and an avoidable recession. According to Gallup, Americans’ economic outlook is now worse than at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic or the global financial crisis — a sobering indicator of just how fragile the moment is.

This is not a partisan issue. It’s a matter of economic survival, community resilience and protecting the American dream for generations to come.

Congress must act now. Small businesses, workers, and families across the country are counting on bold leadership. It’s time to end the tariff chaos, restore stability, and ensure Main Street can keep doing what it does best: creating jobs, driving innovation and strengthening the communities we all call home.

Jay O. Rothman, president of the University of Wisconsin System, speaks during the UW Board of Regents meeting hosted at Union South at the University of Wisconsin–Madison on Feb. 9, 2023. (Photo by Althea Dotzour / UW–Madison)

As Congress is considering remaking the federal financial aid program, Wisconsin higher education leaders are warning that changes could significantly affect access to its campuses. 

Universities of Wisconsin President Jay Rothman wrote in a series of posts on social media last week that he is “very disappointed” by the potential cuts that could be made to student aid. 

Congressional Republicans recently introduced a 103-page proposal that would overhaul the federal financial aid system with cuts meant to help support the extension of tax cuts. Changes would include reducing eligibility for Pell Grants by requiring students take more credit hours to qualify, capping the total amount of student loans one can take out annually and ending certain student loan programs. 

The proposed changes come alongside the Trump administration’s work to remake the system by moving the student loan portfolio from the Department of Education to Small Business Administration, even as both agencies have had significant layoffs, and seeking to eliminate loan relief for people working to support immigrants and trans kids. 

Rothman said nearly half of the 164,400 students across University of Wisconsin campuses rely on federal aid to access the schools and noted that many of the students receiving the help are first-generation college students and low- to middle-income. He said federal financial aid has helped better the U.S. economy and allowed millions of people to improve their own lives. 

“It makes no sense for the US to narrow opportunities if our country wants to win the global War for Talent. I’m dumbfounded that cutting educational opportunities would even be considered when our economic vibrancy is at stake,” Rothman wrote. “While the UWs are among the most affordable in the nation, many lower- and middle-class families rely upon federal financial aid to make these life-changing educational opportunities real.”

Rothman urged Congress to reevaluate the potential cuts in the federal budget, continuing his advocacy for keeping the UW accessible for current and future students. 

In a letter to the Wisconsin Congressional delegation last month, Rothman noted that in the 2023-24 school year, 91,000 UW undergraduate students — or 59% — received some form of financial aid. The federal government distributed $130 million in Pell grants to about 23.4%, or 26,060 undergraduate students that year, delivering an average award of $5,000. 

During that year, undergraduate and graduate students across the system received nearly $1.5 billion in financial aid, including $634 million in grants, $666 million in loans and $13 million in work-study funding.

“Programs like the Pell Grant and other federal financial aid are critical to ensuring continued access and success for students who choose to pursue higher education,” Rothman wrote to lawmakers. “Indiscriminate cuts whether to research, financial aid or programs that provide student support are ultimately shortsighted and will negatively impact the next generation of Wisconsin’s workforce.” 

Rothman is not the only leader who has expressed concerns about cuts to programs. During a hearing last month, Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges and Universities President Eric Fulcomer told state lawmakers that “cutting the Pell Grant or eliminating the Pell Grant would be devastating for our sector.” He said private colleges could be looking at a 27% cut to enrollment.

Bascom Hall, University of Wisconsin-Madison. (Ron Cogswell | used by permission of the photographer)

Madison attorney Shabnam Lotfi says her client, Krish Lal Isserdasani, was exceptionally responsible in the way he handled the news that the Trump administration had suddenly taken away his student visa.

Isserdasani, a 21-year-old computer engineering senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison from India, was about a month out from his graduation on May 10 when he became one of thousands of students across the U.S. that had their Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) records cancelled by the Trump administration. According to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, SEVIS is a “web-based system for maintaining information on nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors” in the U.S. Once SEVIS records were canceled, students faced the termination of their student visas and their ability to remain in the U.S.

UW-Madison notified students of the changes to their SEVIS status, warning them that status termination generally means an affected person should depart the United States immediately.

“I admire him for acting quickly,” Lotfi told the Wisconsin Examiner. “He saw that his SEVIS record was terminated, immediately contacted the university to see what it means, did not attend classes for a week to figure out what’s going on, [and] hired a lawyer immediately.” 

In April, U.S. District Judge William Conley issued a temporary restraining order blocking the government from terminating Isserdasani’s SEVIS and from taking any further related actions. That order noted Isserdasani and his family had spent about $240,000 on his education, stood to lose $17,500 on the current semester’s tuition and would be responsible for four months of rent on an apartment he would vacate if he was forced to leave the country. 

With the temporary restraining order in place and providing some protection, Lotfi said he was able to resume attending classes. 

“That doesn’t necessarily mean he feels entirely welcome and free and comfortable,” Lotfi said, “but he’s doing the best he can with the cards he has in the situation.” 

At the end of April, the Trump administration started reversing the cancellations. Administration attorneys said in court that they were working on developing a policy that would provide a framework for SEVIS record terminations. Lotfi said she is “aware of what they’re thinking about” and that if they’re trying to find a way to make the terminations lawful, that “will likely be challenged again.”

Lotfi said the Trump administration’s step back from the cancellations is a win. This is not the first time she has fought a Trump order involving immigrants, having brought a challenge in 2018 to the Muslim travel ban during Trump’s first term.

“It was a coalition of attorneys nationwide bringing so many [temporary restraining orders], so many lawsuits on behalf of so many students all at the same time — and the government not having any defense to any of it — that caused them to have to reevaluate,” Lotfi said.

As of April 28, the 27 cancellations for UW-Madison students and alumni were reversed as were the 13 for UW-Milwaukee. However, the reversals are not the end of Isserdasani’s case.

When it comes to his case, Lotfi said it appeared during a hearing last week that the government attorneys were not changing their plan to eject Isserdasani based on the administration’s perceived change in stance on international students’ visas. She said the government’s attorney indicated her client’s SEVIS record was only active because of the temporary restraining order and that “it was not related to any change in a government policy.”

“The government attorneys also indicated that they maintain their right to terminate his SEVIS record again in the future should that be necessary,” Lotfi said. “It certainly surprised me, and I think it surprised the court that they were taking that position.” 

Lotfi noted that the government attorneys in Isserdasani’s case have been arguing, based on a declaration by Andre Watson, a Trump Department of Homeland Security official, that the SEVIS record and a student’s visa status are not the same. She said no one is buying the argument. 

“The vast majority of judges nationwide are asking, then, why do you terminate the SEVIS record? What was the point of doing this? If you guys say that SEVIS and student status are not the same, does that mean that Mr. Isserdasani is in a lawful student status right now?” Lotfi said. “They won’t say that. They’ll just say that the two are not the same, but they will not confirm that he is in a lawful student status with the SEVIS terminated.”

The case challenges the cancellation of the record in several ways, including arguing that the government cannot just take away his status without due process — the ability for him to know why his SEVIS is being terminated and to challenge the termination — and arguing the cancellation was arbitrary and capricious.

“It’s not that Isserdasani failed to go to class. It’s not that he had a criminal activity [or] he was convicted of criminal activity. It’s just because his name [was] in a database,” Lotfi said. In determining cancellations, the Trump administration had run international students’ names through an FBI database called the National Crime Information Center. It appeared that an arrest for disorderly conduct in November 2024 was the reason for Isserdasani’s SEVIS cancellation, but charges were never pursued and he never had to appear in court.

Lotfi said she and her client are waiting for the court’s written decision on whether the temporary restraining order will be converted to a preliminary injunction, which would prevent actions by the government through the course of litigation. Then, she said, litigation will continue, which can take time.

“It is in the interest of justice, and in the interest of the American people, that a final decision on the merits of the case is issued,” Lotfi said.

Lotfi said people shouldn’t accept the Trump administration’s accusations against foreign students as true.

“These students are in a foreign country. Many have learned a second language… They are young and alone without family. They are following this country’s rules and regulations, and they didn’t do anything wrong,” Lotfi said. “They don’t deserve this.”

“If it’s a U.S. citizen, we say innocent until proven guilty… Why do we not have that same mindset when it comes to foreign nationals?” she added. “It just seems like any arrest for anything then that’s guilt, and that’s not the case. We would never allow that for any of our neighbors, so we should not accept the administration’s description of international students having violated their status when they didn’t.”

Bascom Hall, University of Wisconsin-Madison. (Ron Cogswell | used by permission of the photographer)

With the 100th day of President Donald Trump’s second term in office approaching, University of Wisconsin-Madison professors and staff met Thursday to take stock of the growing threats to higher education and U.S. democracy and to discuss collective action to push back. 

UW-Madison professor Mark Copelevitch said the threats to higher education are “unprecedented because it’s happening in America” yet compared the current moment to a movie that historians and experts have seen “over and over again.” 

Copelovitch described the current U.S. system of government as competitive authoritarianism. He said comparisons for what is happening today don’t have to go back to 1930s Germany — recent examples are  Viktor Orban in Hungary and Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey. 

“Universities are centers of independent ideas and dissent. Professors are attacked by populist and nationalist leaders as being the radical elite,” Copelovitch said.

University of Wisconsin-Madison faculty, including Copelovitch and other professors were gathered for panels organized by the Public Representation Organization of the Faculty Senate (PROFS) and the Academic Staff Professionals Representation Organization (ASPRO) to discuss shared challenges and the prospects for collective action to defend higher education.

UW-Madison is facing an array of challenges to its operations due to the federal government as over $12 million in research grants to UW-Madison have been cut and caps on indirect cost reimbursements for research grants at 15% represent another significant cut to research funds, and dozens of students across UW campuses and other schools had their visas cancelled. Copelovitch said it is part of a greater attempt to exert influence over the shape of universities across the country.

“What’s happening at Madison [is] terrible and horrible and has real world consequences specifically here,” Copelovitch said. “But again, it is part of a broader pattern that is affecting all the universities across the country. So far, most universities have treated the problems as institution-specific symptoms… That is the big challenge right now. How do you get dozens, if not hundreds of institutions, to start acting collectively to push back against this?”

The panelists said one of the big challenges that universities face is explaining to the public how their budgets work and the impacts of potential cuts.

UW-Madison Veterinary Medicine Research Administration Director Jenny Dahlberg said one lost grant will be “much more broad reaching” than some imagine. “This is an entire generation of scientists that no longer will have opportunities to conduct research. That is alarming,” she said. 

Dahlberg said faculty and staff need to find a way to protect their ability to speak freely about research and to train the next generation. 

Copelovitch said universities will have to communicate to the public about their budgets and recent attacks on academic freedom, and explain that if those things continue it “ultimately means that the universities that people think they’re going to send their kids to eventually are just not going to exist in that format.”

Don Moynihan, a University of Michigan professor and previously a UW-Madison faculty member, said conversations about whether universities are too reliant on federal funding miss the point. He said that investments into research at universities were part of a deal between universities and the government created at the end of World War II. 

“If you will help us with our goals of building out research infrastructure, we will ensure a steady flow of resources into that research infrastructure,” Moynihan said. “Now, we have one of those partners basically withdrawing from the partnership and not just withdrawing from the partnership, but also trying to dictate what the other party does, even though they’re bringing less resources to the table and that activity violated that contract.” 

Moynihan said there’s no way to manage the budget holes that could be created by cuts and that it’s not really feasible that the private sector could fill to gap.

“You’re going to accept or live with a much smaller campus that does much less research…  and that story will be true across lots of other research areas,” Moynihan said. 

Moynihan said the Trump’s administration’s letter to Harvard University, which demanded changes to its administration, student admissions process and called for audits into “DEI” across the campus, lays out a “full menu” of administration priorities. The administration said it would also be cutting over $2 billion in federal grants to the school. 

Moynihan said that it’s clear that individual universities making side deals won’t be a viable strategy. 

“Without collective action, there is not going to be any effective pushback against this administration,” Moynihan said.

Copelovitch said that he has been “heartened” to see the pushback in the last few weeks. UW-Madison Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin signed a letter together with hundreds of other higher education leaders to speak against the “unprecedented government overreach” and the “political interference now endangering American higher education.”  

Copelovitch said discussions about universities banding together, including a recent proposal that  Big Ten schools form a NATO-like agreement, will also be key. 

“No chancellor or provost is going to stick their neck out and lead the fray. Harvard is doing it a little bit, and Harvard can afford to do it, but leaders of any individual public institution are not going to do that, so there’s a need to speak collectively,” Copelovitch said. 

“Fragility” of U.S. democracy

The upheaval in U.S. institutions has gone beyond higher education, and at a separate event, titled “The Fragility and Performance of Democracy in the U.S.” hosted by the Elections Research Center on Thursday afternoon, focused on analyzing Trump’s attacks on the U.S. administrative state and the consolidation of executive power .

UW-Madison professor and director of the Elections Research Center Barry Burden said he didn’t think “any of us imagined we would see the kind of chaos that we’ve experienced these first 100 days,” but said the second Trump administration “has been so massively disruptive” and is “pushing the limits of what a democratic system can handle.” 

“It is doing things that previously seemed illegal, impossible, unimaginable or unconstitutional, and they’re happening daily and often with people who are not really part of the government or part of his party — people like Elon Musk and others — being brought in to do the hatchet work on federal agencies,” Burden said. 

Burden said that Trump is showing warning signs of a “personalized” president, which is often a warning sign for democracies. 

“We’ve seen in other countries where a fairly elected leader, and [Trump] is a fairly elected leader, can nonetheless abuse the government against their enemies and make it a kind of weapon — whether it’s using the IRS for political purposes, or threatening judges or intimidating universities or journalists,” Burden said. “All of those things are using his power as president to get parts of society to bow to him and serve his interests.” 

Burden said the protests being held across the country at state Capitols, in small cities and towns — including in Wisconsin — in recent weeks are a sign that civil society is starting to rise up in opposition. 

“We’ve seen the public come back out of its hiding,” Burden said. He added that unpopularity amongst the public and public resistance — along with accountability by the courts and the media — are what has been essential in resisting autocrats in eastern Europe and Latin America as well. “It’s all hands on deck, really, to stop a democratic government from sliding away.”

Burden said that people need to understand their place in upholding democracy.

“Democracy needs people to keep it flourishing,” Burden said. “It doesn’t operate on its own. We often think of it as a kind of system. You write a constitution, and it exists, and it’s in place, and it will just continue. That’s not how it works. It has to be sustained and tended to and protected. It takes a whole bunch of different actors. It takes the public being vigilant. It takes journalists, media outlets holding government accountable, and transmitting what’s happening. … and it takes political parties to govern themselves and keep bad elements out of government.”

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee during her confirmation hearing on Jan. 15, 2025. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A handful of Democratic U.S. senators sounded the alarm Friday after federal agents arrested a Wisconsin judge on charges she obstructed immigration officials from detaining a man in her courtroom, saying the arrest marked a new low in President Donald Trump’s treatment of the law.

Some congressional Democrats framed the FBI’s Friday morning arrest of Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan as a grave threat to the U.S. system of government, saying it was part of Trump’s effort to expand his own power and undermine the judiciary, with which the administration has become increasingly noncompliant.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer decried the judge’s arrest on social media late Friday afternoon as a “dangerous escalation.”

“There are no kings in America. Trump and (Attorney General Pam) Bondi can’t just decide to arrest sitting judges at will and threaten judges into submission,” wrote Schumer, a New York Democrat.

Trump administration officials, including Bondi, defended the arrest as legitimate. The FBI had been investigating Dugan after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers sought to detain an immigrant without legal authority to be in the country who was in her courtroom on a misdemeanor charge.

Bondi wrote on social media just after noon Eastern, “I can confirm that our @FBI agents just arrested Hannah Dugan — a county judge in Milwaukee — for allegedly helping an illegal alien avoid an arrest by @ICEgov. No one is above the law.”

Democrats object

Democrats in Washington who sounded their objections to the arrest Friday argued it subverted separation of powers.

Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, said Trump “continues to test the limits of our Constitution — this time by arresting a sitting judge for allegedly obstructing an immigration operation at the courthouse.”

In a statement, Durbin added that local courtrooms should be off limits to immigration enforcement agents.

“When immigration enforcement officials interfere with our criminal justice system, it undermines public safety, prevents victims and witnesses from coming forward, and often prevents those who committed crimes from facing justice in the United States,” Durbin wrote.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who represents Wisconsin, issued a statement shortly after news of the arrest, calling it “a gravely serious and drastic move.”

“In the United States we have a system of checks and balances and separation of powers for damn good reasons,” Baldwin said.

“The Trump Administration just arrested a sitting judge,” Arizona’s Ruben Gallego said in a social media post. “This is what happens in authoritarian countries. Stand up now — or lose the power to do so later. The administration must drop all charges and respect separation of powers.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who also sits on the Judiciary Committee, was more careful in his criticism but said Trump is “constantly challenging” separation of powers laid out in the Constitution.

“I don’t know what happened in Wisconsin, but amplifying this arrest as the Attorney General and FBI Director have done looks like part of a larger intimidation campaign against judges,” the Rhode Island Democrat said in a statement.

In a since-deleted post on Bluesky, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey accused Trump of “using immigrants to justify an all-out assault on our democracy and rule of law.

“After openly defying a Supreme Court order, calling for judges to be impeached, and bullying and belittling judges, today his FBI director took the extreme step of ordering a sitting judge arrested,” Booker wrote, referring to the high court’s order that the Trump administration “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who is being held in El Salvador.

Spokespeople for Booker did not respond to a late Friday inquiry about why the post was taken down.

Trump officials back up arrest

Administration officials boasted online following the arrest.

FBI Director Kash Patel deleted a post on X in which he wrote Dugan  “intentionally misdirected federal agents away” from Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a 30-year-old Mexican immigrant accused of misdemeanor battery.

Trump posted a screenshot on his social media site from the conservative activist account “Libs of TikTok” that featured a photo of Dugan and celebrated her arrest.

White House Border Czar Tom Homan said that Dugan crossed a line in her opposition to the administration’s agenda.

“People can choose to support illegal immigration and not assist ICE in removing criminal illegal aliens from our communities, BUT DON’T CROSS THAT LINE,” he wrote on X. “If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or conceal illegal aliens from ICE you will be prosecuted. These actions are felonies. More to come…”

Trump vs. courts

Trump and administration officials have publicly attacked judges online, including calling for the impeachment of District Judge James Boasberg for the District of Columbia after he ordered immigration officials to halt deportation flights to El Salvador.

The administration allowed the flights to reach Central America, and is now at risk of being held in criminal contempt of court as a legal fight plays out.

The president’s verbal attacks on Boasberg prompted a rare rebuke from U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in mid-March.

And the administration has seemingly refused to do anything to facilitate the return of Maryland resident Abrego Garcia from a notorious El Salvador mega-prison, despite a Supreme Court order.