Judge behind bars? FBI charges Hannah Dugan with harbouring undocumented immigrant

In a major development in Milwaukee’s legal community, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents arrested Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan on 25 April 2025. The FBI alleges that Judge Dugan helped an undocumented immigrant, Eduardo Flores Ruiz, evade apprehension by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents inside the Milwaukee County Courthouse. The arrest took place around midday, confirmed by a statement issued by the FBI later in the evening.

Dugan was taken into custody without incident and arraigned before a federal magistrate in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. She faces charges of obstruction of justice and harbouring an undocumented immigrant to prevent arrest. Judge Dugan was released on her own recognisance and is scheduled for a preliminary hearing on 15 May 2025.

What Happened at Milwaukee County Courthouse?

According to the FBI and Department of Justice filings, on 18 April 2025, Judge Dugan allegedly intervened during court proceedings where Flores Ruiz was scheduled to appear for a pre-trial conference related to three misdemeanor battery charges stemming from a domestic incident on 12 March 2025. ICE agents were present at the courthouse with an administrative warrant seeking his detention for immigration violations.

Authorities allege that Judge Dugan, upon learning of ICE’s presence, directed Flores Ruiz and his attorney to use a private hallway normally reserved for court personnel. This act allegedly allowed Flores Ruiz to bypass the public exits where ICE agents were stationed, leading to his temporary evasion from custody.

Flores Ruiz was later apprehended by ICE agents after a short foot pursuit several blocks away from the courthouse. He is now being held at the Dodge Detention Facility pending removal proceedings.

FBI Director Kash Patel, who initially posted about Dugan’s arrest on social media, described her alleged actions as “endangering public safety and interfering with federal enforcement operations.” The post was deleted hours later without any formal retraction.

Why Is Judge Dugan’s Arrest Significant for Judicial Conduct and Immigration Enforcement?

The arrest of a sitting circuit court judge on federal charges is an extremely rare event, raising important questions about the separation of powers, judicial immunity, and the extent of federal jurisdiction over local court operations.

This case arrives amid heightened enforcement actions under President Donald Trump’s second term, particularly concerning undocumented immigration. Federal agencies have increasingly targeted courthouses to apprehend undocumented individuals, citing logistical efficiency. However, this strategy has faced considerable pushback from legal advocacy groups, who argue that it chills immigrant participation in the justice system, making victims and witnesses less willing to appear in court.

Milwaukee, while not officially declared a sanctuary city, has enacted various local policies that restrict cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. This local-federal dynamic adds another layer of complexity to Judge Dugan’s case.

Legal scholars caution that while federal authorities have the right to enforce immigration laws, prosecuting judicial officers for courtroom conduct could create a chilling effect on judicial discretion, potentially undermining constitutional principles of an independent judiciary.

What Charges Does Judge Hannah Dugan Face and What Are the Potential Penalties?

Judge Dugan faces two primary charges under federal law: obstruction of justice and harbouring an undocumented immigrant to prevent arrest.

The obstruction of justice charge stems from allegations that she knowingly interfered with federal officers lawfully attempting to carry out an arrest. Harbouring refers to actions that knowingly assist, shield, or conceal undocumented immigrants from detection or apprehension by law enforcement.

If convicted on both counts, Dugan could face up to 20 years in prison, although sentencing would ultimately depend on factors such as criminal history, role in the offence, acceptance of responsibility, and mitigating circumstances. Federal guidelines typically call for less than the maximum sentence for first-time, non-violent offenders, but prosecutors have indicated that they intend to pursue the matter vigorously given the case’s implications for federal enforcement authority.

Who Are the Key Figures Involved in the Case?

Judge Hannah Dugan, elected in 2016, has built her legal career around public service and social justice advocacy. Before her time on the bench, she worked extensively with Legal Action of Wisconsin and served as executive director of Catholic Charities of Southeastern Wisconsin, organisations heavily involved in providing legal aid to immigrants and low-income communities.

Defence attorney Craig Mastantuono, representing Dugan, issued a strong statement asserting that Judge Dugan “wholeheartedly denies any unlawful conduct” and suggested that the arrest could be interpreted as retaliation for her professional focus on vulnerable populations.

Chief Judge Carl Ashley of Milwaukee County Circuit Court announced an administrative review into Dugan’s actions but stopped short of immediate suspension, pending the outcome of both internal and federal investigations.

ICE officials have confirmed that Flores Ruiz remains in custody and is undergoing expedited removal proceedings. According to ICE regional director Kevin Monahan, the agency considers the matter a “priority case” given its intersection with criminal court activity.

How Are Political Leaders and Legal Experts Reacting?

The reaction to Judge Dugan’s arrest has predictably split along ideological lines. Democratic lawmakers, including Representatives Jamie Raskin and Mark Pocan, expressed concerns that the arrest represented a dangerous federal intrusion into judicial independence. Pocan released a statement warning that prosecuting judges for discretionary courtroom actions could erode public trust in the legal system.

Republicans, on the other hand, have largely praised the FBI’s action. Representative Derrick Van Orden stated that “no one is above the law,” including members of the judiciary, framing the arrest as a necessary move to uphold immigration laws.

Legal experts have pointed out that the case could have lasting impacts regardless of the trial’s outcome. If Dugan is convicted, it may embolden further federal scrutiny of local and state court officials, particularly in jurisdictions perceived to be non-cooperative with immigration enforcement. If she is acquitted, the case may set a legal precedent for protecting judicial discretion even when it conflicts with federal priorities.

What Comes Next for Judge Hannah Dugan?

Judge Dugan’s preliminary hearing is scheduled for 15 May 2025 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Prosecutors must establish that sufficient probable cause exists for the case to proceed to trial.

Separately, the Wisconsin Judicial Commission may open its own ethics investigation, which could result in disciplinary action including suspension or removal, independent of the criminal trial’s outcome.

Legal analysts anticipate a complex and closely watched proceeding that could test the boundaries between judicial conduct and federal enforcement authority. Experts also suggest that the case may influence broader policies around courthouse immigration arrests, particularly as advocacy groups continue to push for clearer boundaries on federal agents operating in state judicial facilities.

Meanwhile, the FBI, ICE, and Department of Justice have declined to comment further on the pending case beyond their initial statements, citing the active criminal proceedings.

How Does This Case Fit Into the Broader Immigration Debate in 2025?

Since President Donald Trump’s return to office in 2024, immigration enforcement has been a central pillar of his administration’s policy agenda. This has included the resumption of controversial measures such as widespread interior enforcement operations, aggressive use of administrative warrants, and pressure on local jurisdictions to fully cooperate with ICE.

The use of courthouses as points of apprehension has drawn lawsuits and legislative challenges, with critics arguing that it discourages access to justice for immigrants. Advocates for stricter immigration controls, however, argue that courthouses offer a practical and secure environment for detaining individuals already engaged with the legal system.

The Hannah Dugan case exemplifies the heightened stakes surrounding immigration enforcement in 2025, as federal and local priorities continue to collide in America’s courtrooms.