Latest news with #HannahDugan
The Independent
11 hours ago
- General
- The Independent
New video shows Judge Hannah Dugan with federal agents in moment that led to her arrest
Newly obtained surveillance footage from inside a Wisconsin courthouse shows a county judge speaking with federal law enforcement officers before they arrested an undocumented immigrant moments after his hearing in the judge's courtroom. A week later, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was placed in handcuffs and accused of obstructing his arrest. Footage from April 18 shows at least six plain-clothes agents in ball caps and hooded sweatshirts arriving on Dugan's floor. At one point, one agent sits directly across from Dugan's courtroom. Minutes after Dugan's arrival, agents see Eduardo Flores-Ruiz and his attorney entering the courtroom. Flores-Ruiz faces domestic abuse charges stemming from an argument with his roommates, according to a criminal complaint. Dugan can be seen speaking to a pair of agents sitting on a bench in the courthouse hallway, and then appears to direct them down the hall. According to the criminal complaint, the agents told the judge they had an administrative warrant, which is typically issued by immigration authorities without a judge. The judge allegedly told the agents to see the chief judge about their plans to make an arrest inside the courthouse. The complaint accuses Dugan of exhibiting 'confrontational, angry demeanor' when speaking with federal agents. The surveillance footage does not include any audio. Dugan is standing still in the video while speaking with two agents, who appear relaxed and slouched on the benches. One agent begins to walk down the hall while Dugan continues speaking with the other agent. Dugan then gestures towards the other end of the hall. She walks the opposite direction when the agents walk away. None of the videos show the inside of her courtroom. A hearing for Flores-Ruiz lasted only a few minutes. Federal prosecutors allege Dugan directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out of her courtroom through a non-public door. But video footage shows the door was just a few feet from the main entrance. Flores-Ruiz and his attorney walk past federal agents as they head towards the elevator. One agent follows them to the elevator. According to a criminal complaint, the agent shared an elevator to the lobby with the both of them. Flores-Ruiz and his attorneys walk down a long hallway to exit the courthouse. An agent is seen walking behind them. Footage from outside the courthouse shows several agents running from the building. The criminal complaint alleges the agents chased Flores-Ruiz on foot before arresting him. Surveillance footage is likely to be used by both prosecutors and defense attorneys to make the case against Dugan. 'If you're predisposed to think that Judge Dugan did something criminal or wrongfully impeded ICE, you can find support for that preconception in the video. It's not conclusive, but you'll feel ratified,' Dean Strang, one of Dugan's attorneys, told ABC News. 'If you start from thinking she didn't do anything criminal, didn't do anything wrong, you'll find support for that in the video,' he added. 'For example, she does not appear to be angry. They don't show her a warrant. The man comes out within a few minutes, ten or 15 feet from where the agents expected him, and two of them see him coming in the hallway.' A two-count indictment charges Dugan with obstruction and concealing Flores-Ruiz to prevent his discovery and arrest. The charges carry a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine. She has pleaded not guilty. A trial is tentatively scheduled to begin July 21. Her high-profile arrest — and Donald Trump 's administration's promotion of the accusations against her — has escalated the president's attacks against the judiciary as he launches an aggressive anti-immigration agenda. Last month, Dugan's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the charges, claiming that the 'government cannot prosecute Judge Dugan because she is entitled to judicial immunity for her official acts.' Trump's efforts to prosecute judges is 'virtually unprecedented and entirely unconstitutional,' they added. The motion cites the Supreme Court's decision affirming presidential 'immunity' from criminal prosecution for actions in office — a ruling that effectively prevented Trump from facing any consequences in the cases against him. More than 150 former state and federal judges joined a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi blasting Dugan's case as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary. 'This cynical effort undermines the rule of law and destroys the trust the American people have in the nation's judges to administer justice in the courtrooms and in the halls of justice across the land,' they wrote. Last week, dozens of former judges filed a brief urging federal prosecutors to dismiss the case, warning that the indictment against her '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. Prosecuting a sitting judge 'establishes a dangerous precedent that will chill judicial decision-making at every level,' they added.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
More than 130 former judges blast Judge Hannah Dugan's indictment as ‘egregious overreach'
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."
The Independent
2 days ago
- General
- The Independent
More than 130 former judges blast Judge Hannah Dugan's indictment as ‘egregious overreach'
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."
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Wisconsin judge who shielded illegal migrant from ICE shares latest defense: 'I am absolutely immune'
A Wisconsin judge indicted for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade ICE is now claiming 'absolute judicial immunity' in a broader legal effort to dismiss all charges. Hannah Dugan, 66, a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, was arrested by FBI agents on April 25 for allegedly preventing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from detaining a man in her courtroom. The man, 31-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, was reportedly subject to a federal detainer at the time. Federal prosecutors allege Dugan directed ICE officers to the chief judge's office while allowing Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to exit through a door typically used by jurors. The long-time judge was later indicted on May 13 on charges of obstructing a federal agency and aiding Flores-Ruiz's escape. However, in a 37-page memorandum filed May 14, her attorneys argued the indictment is an 'ugly innovation' that threatens long-standing legal precedent. They claim Dugan is protected by 'absolute judicial immunity' for actions taken as part of her official duties, even if those actions are later contested. 'Judges can be and are charged for actions wholly unrelated to their role, like taking bribes or kidnapping,' the memo notes, adding that Dugan's conduct occurred squarely within her judicial capacity. Her high-powered legal team, including attorney Dean Strang, warned the case could set a 'dangerous precedent,' undermining judicial independence. 'This is an extraordinary prosecution that poses a threat to federalism and judicial independence,' the filing states. 'Dismissal here flows from a straightforward application of long-settled law. The indictment itself is an ugly innovation. Its dismissal will not be.' The filing continues: 'Nothing in the Constitution allows the federal government to superintend the administration and case-by-case, daily functioning of state courts as this indictment proposes.' This latest motion expands on an earlier filing with more detailed arguments about federal overreach and the constitutional role of judges. Dugan's attorneys maintain she acted within her jurisdiction and broke no laws in declining to facilitate the detention. The US Department of Justice, however, characterizes the incident as obstruction of federal law, triggering a contentious legal and political debate. An amicus brief filed on Friday by 138 former state and federal judges supports Dugan, arguing she is entitled to 'absolute immunity for her official acts.' The brief compares this protection to that granted to members of the legislative and executive branches. It calls the prosecution an 'egregious overreach by the executive branch' that 'threatens public trust in the judicial system and the ability of the public to avail themselves of courthouses without fear of reprisal.' But, the Justice Department maintains that no one - including judges - is above the law when it comes to obstructing federal immigration operations. 'Since President Trump was inaugurated, activist judges have tried to obstruct President Trump and the American people's mandate to make America safe and secure our homeland - but this judge's actions to shield an accused violent criminal illegal alien from justice is shocking and shameful,' Assistant Secretary Department of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. Dugan, who was released after her arrest, pleaded not guilty earlier this month. Her trial is set to begin the week of July 21. If found guilty of both charges, she could face up to six years in prison and $350,000 in fines. She has served as a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge since 2016, winning election with about 65 percent of the vote and running unopposed for reelection in 2022, according to CBS News. As for Flores-Ruiz, he had appeared in Dugan's court on April 18 for a status conference in a misdemeanor battery case, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. He is accused of repeatedly hitting and briefly strangling his roommate, and also striking two women who tried to intervene. Flores-Ruiz has pleaded not guilty to three battery charges and to a separate federal charge of illegally re-entering the US after being deported to Mexico 12 years ago. Six federal agents were present at the courthouse on April 18 to arrest him. He was ultimately taken into custody after a short chase outside the courthouse.
CBS News
3 days ago
- General
- CBS News
More than 130 retired judges urge federal court to drop charges against Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan
A bipartisan group of more than 130 retired judges filed a brief Friday urging a federal court to drop charges against Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan, saying her arrest undermines "centuries of precedent on judicial immunity." Dugan, a Milwaukee County circuit court judge, was arrested April 25 by FBI agents on federal allegations she prevented the arrest of a man by immigration authorities during a federal law enforcement operation at her courthouse. The man, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, was arrested and detained at an immigration detention center. In an amicus brief filed Friday, the group of judges argue that Dugan shouldn't be prosecuted because "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," the brief read. The group of 138 former state and federal judges called the prosecution of Dugan, who was indicted by a grand jury earlier this month on one count each of concealing an individual to prevent arrest and obstruction, an "egregious overreach by the executive branch" that "threatens public trust in the judicial system and the ability of the public to avail themselves of courthouses without fear of reprisal." "Allowing prosecution of Judge Dugan for the alleged actions would create a chilling effect on judges that would stifle independent decision-making and cast doubt on the universal recognition that judges are in charge of maintaining order and decorum in their courtrooms and courthouses," the group of judges wrote. They also argued that prosecuting Dugan "threatens to undermine centuries of precedent on judicial immunity, crucial for an effective judiciary." Dugan, who was released from custody following her arrest, pleaded not guilty earlier this month. A federal judge set her trial to begin the week of July 21. Dugan has served as a judge in Milwaukee County Circuit Court since 2016, after she was elected with about 65% of the vote. She was reelected in 2022 after running unopposed. and contributed to this report.
