More than 130 former judges blast Judge Hannah Dugan's indictment as ‘egregious overreach'

Independent

a day ago

Over 130 former state and federal judges are urging the government to drop its charges against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan, dubbing her indictment an 'egregious overreach' by the executive branch.
The Wisconsin judge was indicted in April after being accused of helping an undocumented migrant flee arrest at her courthouse last month. She faces federal charges of obstructing or impeding a proceeding and concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest — charges that carry a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine. She has pleaded not guilty.
A group of 138 former judges filed an amicus brief in the case Friday, urging the government to dismiss the charges and warning that Dugan's indictment 'threatens to undermine centuries of precedent on judicial immunity, crucial for an effective judiciary.'
The case 'represents an extraordinary and direct assault on the independence of the entire judicial system,' the former judges wrote. 'Permitting the prosecution of a state circuit court judge for conduct falling squarely within her rightful exercise of judicial discretion establishes a dangerous precedent that will chill judicial decision-making at every level.'
The group argued that 'as a judge, she is entitled to absolute immunity for her official acts; this bar on prosecution is the same absolute immunity that is given to members of the legislative and executive branches for their actions taken in an official capacity.'
Dugan's lawyers argued similarly when they filed a motion to dismiss the case this month. Her attorneys cited Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court ruling that determined presidents were immune from criminal prosecution for official acts. 'Judges are entitled to absolute immunity for their judicial acts, without regard to the motive with which those acts are allegedly performed,' her lawyers argued.
Judges can make mistakes, the group acknowledged, but those mistakes are redressed in the judicial branch. 'When judges are alleged to have gotten something wrong or have abused authority dedicated exclusively to the judiciary, it falls exclusively to the judiciary, not prosecutors, to investigate the purported mistake through the appellate process or judicial misconduct proceedings,' they wrote.
The 138 retired judges also blasted the indictment as an 'egregious overreach by the executive branch threatens public trust in the judicial system and the ability of the public to avail themselves of courthouses without fear of reprisal.'
After her initial appearance in court on April 25, she was released from detention. However, the state's supreme court suspended her from the bench days later. 'It is in the public interest that she be temporarily relieved of her official duties,' the state supreme court wrote in an April 29 order.
Friday's amicus brief came weeks after 150 former judges wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi following Dugan's arrest. They slammed Bondi for calling judges 'deranged' on April 25, the day of Dugan's arrest. That same day, FBI Director Kash Patel posted a photo of the judge in handcuffs on his official social media account, writing: 'No one is above the law.'
The Trump administration has repeatedly attacked judges, with the president himself even calling for one to be impeached in a social media post. The post prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare statement: "For more than two centuries it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreements concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."