Wisconsin judge argues

By Todd Richmond

Madison, Wisconsin (AP) – A Wisconsin judge accused of having helped a man who is in the country illegally escapes American immigration agents who were trying to hold him at his courthouse, filed a request for rejection of the case on Wednesday, arguing that there is no legal basis for this.

The lawyers of the County Circuit of Milwaukee County, Hannah Dugan, support in their request that his conduct the day in question was to direct the movement of people in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for the official acts that she plays as a judge. They quote the decision of the United States Supreme Court last year in the case of electoral engineers of President Donald Trump in 2020 who revealed that the former presidents have absolute immunity of prosecution for official acts which fall under their “exclusive sphere of the constitutional authority” and have assumed the right to immunity for all official acts.

“The problems with the accusation are legion, but most of the time, the government cannot continue the Dugan judge because it is entitled to judicial immunity for its official acts,” said the request. “Immunity is not a defense against the accusation which will be determined later by a jury or a court; It is an absolute bar for the accusation at first. ”

The judge supervising his case is Lynn Adelman, former senator from the Democratic State. Former President Bill Clinton appointed him to the bench in 1997.

A spokesperson for the American lawyer’s office in Milwaukee did not immediately respond to an email asking for comments.

Federal prosecutors charged Dugan in April for obstruction and hiding an individual to avoid arrest. A large jury charged him on Tuesday on the same accusations. She risks up to six years in prison if she is found guilty of the two counts.

His lawyers insist that Dugan is innocent. She is expected to argue on Thursday to her indictment to her indictment.

Dugan’s arrest increased a confrontation between the Trump administration and the Democrats on the repression of the republican president’s immigration. Democrats argue that Dugan’s arrest went too far and that the administration is trying to make an example of it to discourage legal opposition to repression.

The case of Dugan is similar to that presented during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of having helped a man to walk a back door of the courthouse to escape a pending law enforcement officer. This case was finally rejected.

According to prosecutors, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz returned to the United States illegally after being expelled in 2013. It was charged in March with the offense of domestic violence in the county of Milwaukee and was in the audience room of Dugan for an audience in this case on April 18.

Dugan’s clerk alerted him that immigration agents were in the courthouse who sought to arrest Flores-Ruiz, according to prosecutors in court documents. According to an affidavit, Dugan visibly angry at the arrival of the agents and described the situation as “absurd”. After having discussed the mandate of the arrest of Flores-Ruiz with the agents, Dugan demanded to speak with the chief judge and removed them from the courtroom.

She then returned to the courtroom, was heard to say something to the effect of “wait, come with me”, then showed Flores-Ruiz and her lawyer by a rear door, says the Affidavit. Immigration agents finally owned Flores-Ruiz outside the building after a prosecution on foot.

Dugan’s request in dismissal also accuses the federal government of having violated the sovereignty of the Wisconsin by disturbing a state courtroom and pursuing a state judge.

“The continuation of the government here directly reaches a state justice palace, disturbing active procedures and interferes with the official functions of an elected judge,” said the request.

The Supreme Court of the State suspended Dugan of the bench last month, claiming that this decision was necessary to preserve the confidence of the public in the judiciary. A reserve judge replaces her for her.

Originally published: May 14, 2025 at 12:20 pm PDT