Ex-New Mexico judge arrested for helping illegal migrant
April 26 (UPI) -- Federal authorities have arrested a former Magistrate Court Judge in New Mexico for allegedly helping an undocumented migrant, while also confirming charges against a Milwaukee judge arrested earlier for similar reasons.
"No one is above the law," Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement issued by the Justice Department.
Former New Mexico Judge Joel Cano and his wife Nancy Cano were arrested earlier this week, for allegedly providing housing to Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, an undocumented Venezuelan national on a property the couple owned.
Officials contend Ortega-Lopez has gang ties the two were aware of but ignored.
"The allegations against Judge Dugan and Judge Cano are serious: no one, least of all a judge, should obstruct law enforcement operations," Bondi said in the statement.
"Doing so imperils the safety of our law enforcement officers and undermines the rule of law. The Department of Justice will continue to follow the facts -- no one is above the law," she said.
Ortega-Lopez was arrested with several other people at the end of February at a property owned by the Cano's near Las Cruces, N.M. Authorities also recovered several firearms at the time.
Officials contend Ortega-Lopez has ties to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal organization designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States.
Jose Cano faces one count of tampering with evidence while Nancy Cano was charged with one count of conspiracy to tamper with evidence. Both face up to 20 years in prison if convicted.
Authorities also officially confirmed charges against Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan who was arrested in her courtroom Friday.
Dugan is charged with one count of "obstructing and impeding a proceeding before a department or agency of the United States" and one additional count of "concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest," for helping Mexican national Eduardo Flores-Ruiz avoid detention at the courthouse last week.
The two charges carry maximum prison sentences of five years and one year respectively.
FBI Director Kash Patel initially confirmed the arrest on X Friday before deleting the post, which later reappeared.
Patel also posted Friday evening a photo of Dugan in handcuffs.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores Ruiz, allowing the subject -- an illegal alien -- to evade arrest," Patel wrote in the social media post, which also congratulates the FBI's Milwaukee field office.
Federal agents later arrested Flores-Ruiz, who had previously been removed from the United States in 2013. He faces firearm charges and a maximum 15-year prison term if convicted.
President Donald Trump has made removing migrants illegally in the United States one of his administration's priorities.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
High court blocks Hamas victims' try to reopen case against Lebanese bank
WASHINGTON, June 5 (UPI) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled unanimously that it would not allow relatives of victims and survivors of Hamas attacks from 2001 to 2003 to reopen a case in which they accused a Lebanese bank of providing financial services to Hamas-affiliated clients. The court ruled in BLOM Bank SAL vs. Michal Honickman, in an opinion delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas, that the plaintiffs did not meet the requirements of extraordinary circumstances for reopening the case. When the case was originally tried in 2019, the relatives and victims lost because they failed to prove the bank knowingly took on clients affiliated with Hamas. The victims and relatives then wanted to offer evidence to which they claimed they had access later. They cited as precedent Rule 60(b), which outlines the reasons why a case could be reopened after a judgement has been issued, such as a mistake in the judgement or evidence unavailable to the plaintiffs during their original case. "It is Rule 60(b)'s standard -- and only Rule 60(b0's standard -- that applies when a party seeks relief from final judgement. A party seeking Rule 60(b) relief must always demonstrate 'extraordinary circumstances' justifying relief," the court wrote. Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson delivered a concurring opinion in which she parted from her colleagues, warning that courts should not deny requests to reopen cases simply because the requesting party was given a chance to amend a case while it was ongoing. "In particular, I think the district court was wrong to fault plaintiffs for making a 'deliberate choice' to appeal the dismissal of their complaint in lieu of accepting various pre-dismissal opportunities to cure purported pleading deficiencies." Brown wrote. The victims and families accused the Lebanese bank of aiding and abetting attacks from 2001 to 2003 by providing financial services to Hamas-affiliated clients. In 2019, the families attempted to sue the bank, but the judge dismissed the suit for not providing evidence that the bank knowingly provided financial services to Hamas-affiliated clients. The court even asked the survivors and families' lawyer if they wanted to amend the case, but they declined. They later found evidence they said proves that the bank knowingly engaged with Hamas affiliates, so they went back to court to reopen their case. Their lawyer, Michael Radine, criticized the Supreme Court's decision. Radine said in a statement to UPI that the district court would not allow his clients to retry the case unless they could meet "the erroneous and essentially unmeetable pleading standards raised by the defendant and adopted by the district court." He added that the district court required evidence such as acts or statements from bank employees proving affiliations with Hamas before discovery. "Few plaintiffs will have access to a defendant's internal communications before discovery, which is why the [2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals] tossed that pleading standard as 'too exacting,'" Radine said in the statement. During the original case, the families appealed to the 2nd Circuit and were turned down again, so they returned to the lower courts and asked to retry the case and submit evidence proving that the bank knowingly provided financial services to Hamas-affiliated individuals. They were told their case did not meet the requirement to be reopened, so the plaintiffs appealed that decision to the 2nd Circuit again. "Indeed, today's decision could empower district courts to prevent plaintiffs from amending their complaints whenever the state of the applicable law is unclear," Radine said. BLOM Bank SAL's lawyer Michael Hugh McGinley didn't respond to a request for comment.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DHS expedites 36 miles of border wall, waiving environmental laws
June 5 (UPI) -- The Department of Homeland Security on Thursday issued three new waivers for roughly 36 miles of a new border wall in Arizona and New Mexico. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem approved the waivers, which allow environmental laws to be disregarded for border wall construction. DHS said in a statement, "The Secretary's waiver authority allows DHS to waive environmental laws -- including the National Environmental Policy Act -- to ensure the expeditious construction of physical barriers and roads, by minimizing the risk of administrative delays." DHS said the waivers to expedite the border wall project "are critical steps to secure the southern border and reinforce our commitment to border security." The project list for border wall construction under these waivers includes three in the El Paso sector, one in the Yuma sector and three in Tucson. Funding is provided through U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Fiscal year 2020 and 2021 appropriations. President Donald Trump pushed for a border wall during his first term, promising that he would build a wall along the Mexico-U.S. border and that Mexico would pay for it. Mexico did not pay for it. About 500 miles of border wall was built during Trump's first term.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Immigrant advocates say Trump travel ban adds to uncertainty for Milwaukee families
Local and national immigrant advocates expressed concern and uncertainty about President Donald Trump's newly instituted ban on travel to the U.S. from 19 countries and how it could impact Milwaukee-area families waiting to reunite with relatives abroad. The ban is a new take on the so-called "Muslim travel ban" from Trump's first administration, a prominent policy that faced legal challenges and went through several iterations before it was upheld by the Supreme Court. Former President Joe Biden tossed it out when he took office. Set to take effect Monday, the order bars travel from 12 countries and enacts partial restrictions on seven other countries. This time, some, but not all, have Muslim-majority populations. And there are some exceptions for certain people, such as people who are legal U.S. residents; Iranians from persecuted ethnic or religious minorities; and people with immediate American family members who have applied for visas connected to their relatives. Milwaukee is a hub for immigrants, refugees and students from a number of the countries included in the ban, including Myanmar, Laos, Afghanistan and Iran. The order will likely delay reunions between local residents and relatives abroad who were trying to join their families in the U.S., said Sheila Badwan, executive director of the Hanan Refugees Relief Group, a refugee resettlement agency. Badwan thought of single Afghan mothers in Milwaukee who have been waiting for their husbands to join them, and former Afghan soldiers who have been separated from their wives and children since the Taliban took over. While the order has an exception for Afghans who worked with U.S. forces and are Special Immigrant Visa holders, many others trying to join family do not have those SIVs in hand. The federal refugee resettlement program has been halted since Jan. 20, Trump's first day in office. An executive order said the stoppage was supposed to be reviewed within 90 days, but no review has been produced, the program has not restarted, and tens of thousands of people approved to resettle before the executive order have not arrived. The new travel ban means people can expect even more delays, Badwan said. "Emotions are high right now," Badwan said. "It's definitely devastating." In a proclamation signed June 4, Trump cited "national security risks" posed by citizens of the targeted nations as a reason for the new ban. "Nationals of some countries also pose significant risks of overstaying their visas in the United States, which increases burdens on immigration and law enforcement components of the United States, and often exacerbates other risks related to national security and public safety," Trump wrote in a proclamation. Mark Hetfield, president of national refugee resettlement group HIAS, originally the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, said the Trump administration's method of choosing the countries based on their rate of how many people overstay temporary visas "makes absolutely no sense" and likely will be challenged in court. "The rationale is irrational," he said. "They're having blanket bans on immigrant visas based on nonimmigrant overstays." One country with a total ban is Myanmar, or Burma. Milwaukee is believed to be home to one of the largest populations of Burmese refugees in the U.S., including several persecuted ethnic minorities, including the Rohingya, who are Muslim, as well as the Chin, Karen and Karenni, who may practice Christianity, Buddhism or folk religions. Wisconsin also has the third-largest Hmong population in the country. Many of the first Hmong refugees to the state fled Laos after helping the American military during the Vietnam War. Lo Neng Kiatoukaysy, executive director at the Hmong American Friendship Association, said the travel ban would make it more difficult to visit family and limit opportunities for cultural exchange and education. 'Our great grandma and grandpa, they were in the same shoes as many of the immigrants here today,' he said. 'And what if this happened when they came to America back then? They would not want to have the same fear, the same intense feeling, this isolation that we're experiencing right now.' International students, a particular target of the Trump administration in recent months, could also be affected by the travel ban. Iranians made up the fourth-largest international student contingent at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in fall 2024, according to university data, with 61 students. At UW-Madison, there were 57 Iranian students last semester. More: ICE orders Milwaukee teacher's aide Yessenia Ruano to leave US, fly to El Salvador in days People who have valid visas should not be affected by the ban, the National Iranian American Council said in an informational document. But the organization urged caution for people who haven't yet arrived in the U.S. "Some number of Iranian nationals have continued to receive visas in the opening months of 2025 and may not yet have entered the United States. While the order states these visas should be valid, experience tells us that this does not guarantee there will not be complications attempting to enter the U.S. – particularly amid the rollout of this order," the council said. UW-Madison's International Student Services said it is reviewing the details of the travel ban. In a statement, they advised those from affected countries to 'seriously reconsider any travel plans outside of the U.S.' Beyond affecting travel to and from the U.S., the ban tells Muslim families that "their faith makes them suspect," and it fuels fear in Muslim-American communities, said Fauzia Qureshi, executive director of the Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance. "A reinstatement of the travel ban sends a chilling message," she said, adding: "Policies like this make people feel alienated from the very country they contribute to." Hetfield, president of HIAS, said the Trump administration changed its strategy this time by adding other countries — including some in Latin America, Africa and southeast Asia — as courts ruled it was not legal to ban Muslims specifically. "They dressed it up, they put lipstick on it," he said, but ultimately, "it's a way to prevent brown people from coming to this country." This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Trump travel ban adds to uncertainty for Milwaukee immigrant families
