Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping a criminal alien evade justice, won’t be able to hide behind her black robes to escape accountability under the law.
Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Dugan’s motion to dismiss charges based on “judicial immunity” has been rejected by a federal judge.
U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman ruled that Dugan is not entitled to judicial immunity and found that the actions she is accused of fall outside the protection normally afforded to judges acting in their official capacity.
“Ultimately, as the Supreme Court has stated, ‘the official seeking absolute immunity bears the burden of showing that such immunity is justified for the function in question,’” Adelman wrote in the ruling. “I cannot say as a matter of law that the defendant’s alleged conduct falls within even this more limited version of immunity.”
Dugan was indicted in April following an incident on April 18 at the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Prosecutors allege that Dugan became aware of plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents waiting in the courthouse to detain a defendant in her courtroom, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a foreigner facing three misdemeanor battery charges.
According to the indictment and surveillance footage reviewed by authorities, Dugan confronted the agents in a courthouse hallway, advised them they needed a judicial warrant to make the arrest, and directed them to the chief judge’s office. Prosecutors say she then conducted the matter off the record instead of holding a scheduled hearing and allowed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to exit the courtroom through a rear entrance, allegedly to avoid ICE detection.
Despite these efforts, Flores-Ruiz was arrested by ICE agents later that day.
Dugan’s legal team filed a motion arguing that she was acting in her judicial capacity and was therefore immune from prosecution. Her attorneys claimed that the charges against her violate the Tenth Amendment and the constitutional principle of separation of powers, asserting that the federal government does not have the authority to criminally charge a state judge for courtroom decisions made while discharging judicial duties.
The defense further argued that judicial immunity extends to all judicial acts short of criminal behavior wholly unrelated to the judge’s duties, such as bribery or intentional violations of constitutional rights, neither of which Dugan is accused of.
Adelman rejected those arguments, writing, “There is no basis for granting immunity simply because some of the allegations in the indictment describe conduct that could be considered ‘part of a judge’s job.’”
He concluded that the specific actions alleged—interfering with a federal arrest, misleading agents about legal requirements, and facilitating a physical escape—go beyond the normal scope of protected judicial activity.
The ruling does not determine Dugan’s guilt or innocence but allows the case to proceed. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Sept. 3 in federal court. Both federal prosecutors and Dugan’s defense attorneys have stated that they would like to begin trial proceedings before the end of the year. No trial date has yet been set.
The case has drawn national attention due to its unusual nature. While tensions between local and federal authorities over immigration enforcement have become more common in recent years, it is rare for a sitting judge to face criminal charges for obstructing federal agents in the line of duty.
The outcome of this case could have broader implications for how courts interpret the boundaries of judicial immunity in relation to federal law enforcement.
Flores-Ruiz remains in ICE custody pending immigration proceedings, according to officials. The Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office has not commented on whether the local criminal charges against him are still active.
If convicted, she could face fines or imprisonment, though the specific penalties will depend on the outcome of trial proceedings. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has declined to comment further on the pending case.