Graham Kilmer

Dugan Legal Team Strongly Disagrees With Federal Judge

Attorneys still pushing to dismiss criminal case against Judge Hannah Dugan.

By - Jul 16th, 2025 12:39 pm
Milwaukee Federal Courthouse. Photo by Mariiana Tzotcheva

Milwaukee Federal Courthouse. Photo by Mariiana Tzotcheva.

Hannah Dugan‘s attorneys are not holding back.

The federal government has no right or power to prosecute a state judge for the five acts or decisions that this indictment alleges. It never has,” her attorneys Dean Strang, Steven Biskupic, Jason Luczak and Nicole M. Masnica wrote in a recent filing.

Federal Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph recently recommended denying a motion to dismiss the federal criminal charges against Dugan. Joseph did not agree with Dugan’s attorneys that judicial immunity could be extended to immunity from criminal prosecution, even if the judge is performing official duties of the court.

“This is a federal criminal prosecution of a state judge for doing her job; not in the way that some federal agents preferred, true, but her job all the same,” Dugan’s attorneys wrote in a response to Joseph’s decision. “Yet the magistrate judge would allow it to proceed.”

For Dugan, the distinction between official and unofficial acts of the office matters greatly. Her attorneys have conceded that judicial immunity could not protect judges from prosecution for actions that are not official duties, or are self enriching, like accepting a bribe. They also agree that case law has settled the fact that judges can be criminally prosecuted for official actions if those actions deprive someone of their constitutional rights.

They argue, however, that neither of those situations apply to Dugan’s case, and that failing to make the distinction opens the door to federal agents targeting state judges they don’t like; that this prosecution violates the longstanding practice of separation of powers by the U.S. government.

“[Joseph’s recommendation] posits a rule that would have been anathema to the Framers,” Dugan’s attorneys wrote. “They yielded sovereignty only to a federal government with strictly limited powers. The idea that the federal government someday could arrest and prosecute state judges for official acts in derogation of long-settled English immunity would have been wrong to them.”

The actions at the heart of the case, according to the federal government occurred at the Milwaukee County Courthouse on April 18. Dugan allegedly sent immigration agents away from her courtroom after determining they were there to arrest an immigrant appearing there on criminal charges, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz. She then adjourned the matter and sent Flores-Ruiz out of the court room through a door used by jurors. Federal agents arrested him outside of the court house shortly after.

For this, Dugan is charged with allegedly obstructing or impeding a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation and concealing an individual from arrest.

In her filing, Joseph agreed the actions detailed by federal prosecutors are “part of a judge’s job.” That includes evaluating whether a warrant establishes probable cause, directing agents in the hallway to go speak with the Chief Judge about a planned arrest, discussing a case off the record, telling persons in her court room what doors to use and instructing parties they can appear by zoom.

Dugan’s attorneys argue the recommendation does not include a limiting principle on when judges can’t be prosecuted for official acts. This leaves judges “vulnerable” to arrest and prosecution by federal agents that have inconvenienced, which could be construed as impeding them, they argue.

“A judge handling a child pornography case or a drug case, with either child pornography images or controlled substances passed around as evidence in court (that is, possessed and distributed), would be at the mercy of federal law enforcement,” her attorneys wrote in their response. “So would any state or federal judge scheduling a hearing or holding over an undocumented accused, victim, or material witness in ways that irritate or slow federal officers hoping to arrest or remove the undocumented person with a crucial role in the case.”

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States, where the court ruled the president has “absolute immunity” from prosecution for actions within his “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority,” has been used by Dugan’s attorneys to argue judicial immunity bars prosecution in her case.

Joseph did not agree the decision applied, writing that such application would “expand the judicial immunity principles” to civil actions against official judicial actions.

Dugan’s attorney’s argue Joseph is making the same “mistake” a lower court did while reviewing Trump, which concluded presidents only enjoyed civil immunity for official acts.

That is not just a superficial parallel to this case,” her attorneys wrote. “The linkage between judicial immunity and the presidential immunity that Trump settled is deeper than that. As Judge Dugan traced in her earlier briefs, Trump rests in significant part on judicial immunity cases for official acts. Presidents and former presidents now have what judges had first.”

The response to Joseph’s recommendation will be reviewed by U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Adelman, who is presiding over the case and will issue a final decision on the motion to dismiss. However he decides, the prosecution or the defense could still appeal the ruling to a higher court.

If you think stories like this are important, become a member of Urban Milwaukee and help support real, independent journalism. Plus you get some cool added benefits.

Leave a Reply

You must be an Urban Milwaukee member to leave a comment. Membership, which includes a host of perks, including an ad-free website, tickets to marquee events like Summerfest, the Wisconsin State Fair and the Florentine Opera, a better photo browser and access to members-only, behind-the-scenes tours, starts at $9/month. Learn more.

Join now and cancel anytime.

If you are an existing member, sign-in to leave a comment.

Have questions? Need to report an error? Contact Us