Outside courthouse, supporters call Judge Hannah Dugan's arrest a 'constitutional crisis'
Her supporters pled for felony charges to be dropped at a press conference outside the county courthouse April 28, where Dugan was arrested by federal authorities April 25 for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest after he appeared in her courtroom.
In a brief interview with the Journal Sentinel before the press conference, Milwaukee County Board first vice-chair Steven Shea asserted the Trump administration intentionally cracked down on a judge in Wisconsin, the "most purple of states."
"They could not have picked a worse possible judge, because she will stand up for the constitution, due process, the rule of law, every step of the way," Shea said.
Dugan's arrest has reached news outlets like BBC and The Irish Times, and it should be considered international news, Shea said. "This is a pivotal moment in American history."
Other speakers during the hour-long press conference, including state Sen. Tim Carpenter, D-Milwaukee, called Dugan's arrest a sign of a constitutional crisis in which the Trump administration is no longer respecting the checks and balances of the judicial branch.
"When they went ahead and put the handcuffs on our good friend Hannah Dugan, they put handcuffs on the judiciary," Carpenter said.
Republicans in Wisconsin signaled they may act to remove Dugan through an impeachment proceeding. Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August, R-Walworth, said charges against Dugan are "serious, deeply troubling, and strike at the core of public trust."
"I would advise everyone to cooperate with federal law enforcement and not endanger them and the public by obstructing their efforts to arrest criminals and illegal aliens," U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson said previously in a statement to the Journal Sentinel.
More: Politicians, lawyers and more react to arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan
Sen. Chris Larson, D-Milwaukee, said he texted Dugan Monday and she responded that she's "doing okay." Larson described Dugan as soft-spoken, Catholic-adhering and "the person who's going to bring the best dish at the potluck." He said she sends celebratory emails on Constitution Day and Bill of Rights Day.
Dugan, 65, is scheduled for a May 15 preliminary hearing. Her case will eventually go before a grand jury. As of April 28, Dugan's cases are being handled by David Feiss, a reserve judge and former prosecutor in Milwaukee County.
The two charges against Dugan — obstructing a U.S. agency and concealing an individual to prevent an arrest — carry a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine, though sentences in nonviolent offenses are usually much shorter.
More: Read the charges against Judge Dugan, arrested by FBI in ICE case
More: What's next in Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan's case?
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Advocates call Judge Hannah Dugan's arrest a 'constitutional crisis'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
9 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
This Senator Made A Very, Very Good Point About Trump's Weird Comment About Gold
A bunch of Donald Trump's new tariffs went into effect on August 7. But there's one thing that won't be hit with a tariff, and that's gold. Yep, gold is off the table! Some people pointed how that this could be because of all of the gold in the Oval Office. Other people compared him to an Austin Powers villain. And this person said, "I miss when the federal government wasn't a meme." But one reply to Trump's post is going more viral than the rest, and it's from Senator Chris Coons of Delaware. Here's what he said: "Trump could have cancelled tariffs on groceries, clothing, back-to-school supplies – any one of a number of things that would have reduced costs for American families. Instead, he chose gold." NextGen America responded to that comment, "Trumponomics, simplified: More golden ballrooms for him, more tariffs for the rest of us." Thoughts?
Boston Globe
9 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
The White House is launching a review of exhibits at eight Smithsonian museums. Here's what to know.
In response, the Smithsonian said in a statement on Tuesday that it remained committed to 'scholarly excellence, rigorous research, and the accurate, factual presentation of history.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We are reviewing the letter with this commitment in mind and will continue to collaborate constructively with the White House, Congress, and our governing Board of Regents,' it said in a statement. Advertisement Here's what to know about the Smithsonian and the Trump administration's review of its museums. What is the Smithsonian Institution? A Smithsonian Institution sign is seen on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall on March 28, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Kevin Dietsch/Getty The Smithsonian Institution is the world's largest museum, education, and research complex, and includes 21 museums and the National Zoo, with 11 museums lining Washington's National Mall. It was founded with funds from British scientist James Smithson, who left his estate to the United States to create 'an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge' in Washington. Which Smithsonian museums are under review? The review, first Advertisement 'This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions,' the letter said. The letter said additional museums would be reviewed in subsequent phases. How long will the review take and what will it entail? The review will take a look at all public-facing content, such as education materials, social media and digital content 'to assess tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals,' according to the letter. The review will also include curatorial processes and guidelines, exhibition planning and collection use. The White House is directing the museums to submit materials from exhibits and drafts for upcoming events within 30 days. Within 75 days, museums are asked to submit the 'remaining requested documentation including promotional literature, grant data, educational materials, and guided tour content.' Within 120 days, the letter said, museums will be expected to take corrective action, 'replacing divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying, historically accurate, and constructive descriptions.' Earlier this month, its National Museum of American History had temporarily What's Trump's existing relationship with the Smithsonian? On March 27, Trump Advertisement The order placed Vice President JD Vance, a member of the Smithsonian Institution's Board of Regents, in charge of overseeing the effort to 'remove improper ideology' across the institution's museums, education and research centers, and the National Zoo. 'Museums in our Nation's capital should be places where individuals go to learn — not to be subjected to ideological indoctrination or divisive narratives that distort our shared history,' the Material from the Associated Press was used in this report. Alyssa Vega can be reached at
New York Times
10 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Democrats Are in Danger. So Are the Republicans.
'Twenty years from now, will we be a country of Democrats and Republicans taking turns on who's in power?' Pete Buttigieg asked recently. 'I'm not so sure.' Speaking to Mosheh Oinounou, a podcaster and former CBS News producer, the conspicuous institutionalist casually blasted the country's institutions and proposed that, amid the wreckage, America's political future was not at all intuitive. 'We're past the point of just believing that there's some pendulum that comes back and forth,' Buttigieg went on. 'I think that both parties should examine the chances of their survival.' Americans love to decry the country's limited political menu, and talking up third-party challenges to the two-party system has been a cottage industry at least since Ross Perot. In a time of anti-establishment feeling, there's additional incentive to hype a crackup, even though structural forces make that chatter look perennially foolish. And I'm not predicting that America's two major parties are going to actually split up anytime soon. But peek across the Atlantic at the changing shape of our close-cousin democracy in Britain, and the possibilities seem, as Buttigieg suggests, open. It was just last summer that Keir Starmer and Labour won a smashing victory over Rishi Sunak and the Conservatives, bringing a striking end to more than a decade of Tory austerity rule and securing the second-largest parliamentary majority since World War II. But just over a year later, Starmer's net approval rating has fallen from plus 10 to minus 40. Labour as a whole has lost more support in its first 10 months in office than any other governing party in 40 years. Labour's Rachel Reeves, the chancellor of the Exchequer, broke into tears last month in Parliament, in a richly symbolic event for the British political media. Since resuming power, her party has struggled to deliver meaningful new policy or escape the widespread impression of nervous, triangulating centrism. To trust the polls, the strongest challenger is now not the Conservative Party, as tradition would suggest, but Reform — Nigel Farage's rebrand of the upstart Brexit party, a populist-nihilist meme factory very much in the MAGA mold. Reform won only five seats in Parliament last summer, but it has maintained a steady polling lead over Labour since April — and an even larger lead over the Tory coalition from which it mostly sprang. Through the summer, polls have suggested that in the event of a sudden election, Reform would win, indeed quite spectacularly: Estimates suggest a huge 200-seat margin, for a party that did not even exist at the time of the Brexit vote. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
