Wisconsin -Judge must face charges in the case of ICE obstruction

(Bloomberg) – A state judge in Wisconsin must face criminal charges of interfering with US immigration authorities after a federal judge rejected her claim of immunity. The decision Tuesday means that the US Justice Department could move forward with the prosecution of Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan. Her accusation was part of a broader setback by US officials against so-called sanctuary cities and local authorities considered in the way of President Donald Trump’s immigration suppression. Dugan, who has denied offenses, can appeal the decision by US district judge Lynn Adelman. The decision did not address the merits of the underlying criminal case. Adelman adopted the recommendation of an American magistrate’s judge who refuted Dugan’s demand for immunity to the prosecution of the action she took as a judge and suggested that the case go forward. The advocates of Dugan and a spokesman for the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Dugan was arrested in May and accused of trying to prevent members of an American immigration and customs handling task force from arresting a Mexican immigrant, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who appeared in her courtroom. According to the accusation of two scores, Dugan Federal Officials from Flores-Ruiz’s location ordered within the Milwaukee Court House and then allowed him and his lawyer to leave through a non-public door. Adelman rejected Dugan’s arguments for immunity that protect the judges from being prosecuted for actions they take related to their official duties. The judge also found that the government argued that Dugan’s alleged actions fell out of her judicial role, which meant she would not be covered, even if there was a limited judicial immunity. “There is no basis to grant immunity simply because some of the allegations in the indictment of accusation describe behavior that can be considered” part of a judge’s work “,” Adelman wrote. Flores-Ruiz was arrested outside the court. In June, he pleaded guilty to being illegal in the US and agreed to be deported, according to court records. Dugan’s advocates also argued that the indictment violated the power of the Constitution between the federal government and states. Her attorneys cited the US Supreme Court ruling last year that Trump – and all US presidents – has immunity to prosecution for official acts. “Judges have been empowered to maintain control of their court halls specifically and the court in general,” the advocates of Dugan wrote. The US Attorney’s Office in Milwaukee, which handles the prosecution, opposed that Dugan’s advocates a ‘manufactured version’ of judicial immunity on a ‘virtually unestmitted and inaccurate storyline that the federal government somehow tried to control a state court or “a state court.” Early in July, US Magistrate’s Judge Nancy Joseph Adelman asked to reject the demand of the immunity, saying the indictment was not related to Dugan’s legal opinions or management of the courtroom, but separate, obstructive acts. Joseph has Dugan’s argument that a judge’s motive, especially whether they acted for ‘self -enrichment’, was of interest. Federal magistrate’s judges are appointed by the US district judges for eight years. They can provide for certain cases and provide binding decisions, but also serve a support role, including preparing reports with recommendations for district judges to consider in a case on disputed issues. A hearing was originally scheduled to begin on July 21, but was postponed indefinitely in the midst of the immunity fight. The case is USA v. Dugan, 25-CR-89, US District Court, Eastern District Wisconsin (Milwaukee). (Updated with details from the opinion and background.) More stories like these are available on Bloomberg.com © 2025 Bloomberg MP