MILWAUKEE — A Wisconsin judge was convicted on Dec. 18 of a felony count of obstructing federal agents making an immigration arrest outside of court. The precedent-setting incident has garnered national attention and sparked protests.
Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was indicted in April on charges of obstruction and concealment to prevent the arrest of a man who was in the United States without legal authorization. After more than six hours of deliberation, the jury returned a split verdict, finding him not guilty of the misdemeanor concealment charge.
“We weren’t trying to make an example of anyone. This was necessary to hold Judge Dugan accountable for his actions,” Interim U.S. Attorney Brad Schimmel said. “There is no political aspect to this.”
Dugan’s attorney, Steve Biskupic, emphasized that the jury’s verdict was split and that the elements of the two counts are the same. Dugan, 66, showed no emotion as the sentence was read.
“This is far from the end of the case,” Biskupic said.
Biskupic said his team will file a motion asking U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman to vacate the conviction based on the split verdict. A sentencing hearing has not been set. The government also offered Mr. Dugan a plea deal, but no agreement was reached and details were not disclosed.
The case thrust Dugan, who served as a judge for nine years, into the center of a conflict between the judiciary and the Trump administration over its sweeping crackdown on immigration across the country. This is the first time a state judge has tried a case on charges of interfering with an immigration officer.
The case began as an ordinary day in state court.
On April 18, Dugan was presiding over misdemeanor court on the sixth floor of the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Earlier, federal immigration officials had arrested two people on suspicion of entering the country without authorization, sparking tension among county judges.
Federal agents were at the scene to arrest Eduardo Flores Ruiz, 31, who was charged with assault and turned himself in before Mr. Duggan. Flores-Ruiz had re-entered the United States without authorization in 2013.
Mr. Dugan asked the clerk about the arrest plan. She went to the main hallway with another judge, asked questions of a representative, and was escorted to the presiding judge’s office. So the presiding judge was making plans for how to handle such arrests.
Witnesses testified that Dugan returned to the courtroom and proceeded with Flores-Ruiz’s case, then led Flores-Ruiz and her attorney through a closed door into a hallway used by the judge and staff.
Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer came out into the public hallway. Federal agents pursued them. He was arrested outside the courthouse after a brief foot chase.
A week later, FBI agents arrested Dugan and led him out of the Milwaukee County Courthouse in handcuffs. Mr. Flores-Ruiz was subsequently deported.
Prosecutors avoided politics and focused on five acts
The government subpoenaed 19 witnesses, ranging from federal officials to fellow judges. The defense called two of his fellow judges, his public defender, and his longtime friend, former Mayor Tom Barrett. Dugan himself did not take a position.
Both sides largely agreed on the basic facts of what happened. Questions focused on Dugan’s intentions.
Federal prosecutors used the indictment as a roadmap for the case, highlighting things they say Mr. Dugan did unusually, even in a crowded courtroom. They also used video of Dugan’s interactions with agents and audio from inside the courtroom to paint a picture of a judge intent on defying ICE agents.
Dugan’s court reporter offered to have the two leave, but Dugan said he would, adding, “I’ll beat the heat.”
Judge Cristela Cervera, a key witness, testified that she was reluctant to be in the hallway with Dugan and was shocked to learn of the charges against him.
“Judges should not help defendants avoid arrest,” Cervera testified.
Under cross-examination, Cervera admitted that after the incident, he sent an email to his attorney’s sister warning her that ICE agents were in the building. Defense attorneys said she cooperated with the government to save herself. The government downplayed the documents to her sister.
Defense lawyers question details
Although President Donald Trump’s name came up only a few times at trial, his immigration enforcement efforts were a theme throughout the National Defense Strategy.
Dugan’s lawyers said the Trump administration was trying to use her as an example to “crush” Dugan. They described Dugan as a dedicated public servant who tried to follow guidance on how to handle such arrests rather than try to thwart investigators.
Her lawyers argued that some of the acts the government called crimes happen every day in the busy state courthouse.
Dugan’s team tried to have the case thrown out, arguing that as a judge she was immune from prosecution. Adelman denied their motion, but the team retained the ability to make its case later.
Contributor: Hope Karnopp, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
