Courts, Criminal law, Politics

“This Judge is a Hero”: Democratic Politicians and Judges Praise Judge Dugan and Call for Resistance

The defense team for Judge Hannah Dugan is likely  thinking, “This is not helpful.” While Dugan initially contested the allegations that she assisted an illegal immigrant to evade federal authorities in her Milwaukee courthouse, Democrats are heralding her as a type of Harriet Tubman guiding illegal immigrants to safety.  Democratic State Rep Ryan Clancy even declared to a cheering crowd: “What Judge Dugan apparently did was what all of us should be doing.” That is precisely why federal authorities felt criminal charges were warranted despite Dugan’s judicial title.

According to the criminal complaint, a six-person arrest team (including an ICE officer, a Customs and Border Protection officer, two FBI special agents, and two DEA agents) came to the courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican immigrant facing three misdemeanor battery counts they intended to deport.

He is accused of hitting someone 30 times during a fight that erupted over complaints that his music was too loud and assaulting three separate individuals, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.

Flores-Ruiz was previously deported and then entered again illegally, a federal felony. He was issued an I-860 Notice and Order of Expedited Removal on January 16, 2013, and Flores-Ruiz was “removed to Mexico through the Nogales, Arizona, port of entry.” Not only is reentry a felony but when there is an order of expedited removal, you can be deported without any further court hearing.

After facilitating his escape, Dugan was later arrested and charged with obstructing or impeding a proceeding (18 U.S.C. 1505) and concealing an individual to prevent his arrest (18 U.S.C. 1071).

Calls for resistance and even replication have also come from colleagues on the bench. Monica Isham, a circuit judge in Sawyer County, not only defended Judge Hannah Dugan in an email to other state judges but added that she “has no intention of allowing anyone to be taken out of my courtroom by [Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents] and sent to a concentration camp.”

The email is titled “Guidance requested or I Refuse to Hold Court” and, after pledging to also resist ICE, asks “Should I start raising bail money?”

Isham added:

“Enough is enough. I no longer feel protected or respected as a Judge in this administration. If there is no guidance for us and no support for us, I will refuse to hold court in Branch 2 in Sawyer County. I will not put myself or my staff who may feel compelled to help me or my community in [harm’s] way. If this cost me my job or it gets me arrested, then at least I know I did the right thing.”

These judges have been joined by national Democratic leaders who have lionized Dugan, even before all of the facts were established. Within hours, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., called the arrest “a drastic move threatening the rule of law” and a “grave step that undermines our system of checks and balances.”

Her Minnesota colleague, Sen. Tina Smith, decried that “Donald Trump is arresting judges he doesn’t like!”

Dugan was showered with accolades from the left, with such postings as “The FBI has arrested a judge who helped migrants avoid ICE. This judge is a hero.”

Democratic politicians who line up to support Judge Dugan often omit the details of the arrest. It may be worth reviewing a few of those details.

The complaint details how the officers sought to satisfy Dugan who was described as angry and uncooperative. That included (upon Judge Dugan’s insistence) locating the Chief Judge and confirming that they could facilitate an arrest in the hallways as public areas. Here is the account:

After showing ID and badges, [a shift sergeant with Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office] asked that any arrest wait until after the completion of the scheduled hearing before Judge DUGAN. As this was standard practice, Deportation Officer A and CBP Officer A agreed, and they were allowed to proceed unescorted to the public hallway outside of Courtroom 615. . . .

FBI Agent A displayed his credentials to the courtroom deputy and informed him that they were there to assist ICE in arresting Flores-Ruiz. They agreed that the arrest would take place after Flores-Ruiz’s court appearance. The agents then left the courtroom and took positions at different locations in the public hallway.

…

Judge DUGAN and Judge A, who were both wearing judicial robes, approached members of the arrest team in the public hallway. Judge A’s courtroom is located adjacent to Judge DUGAN’s courtroom. Witnesses uniformly reported that Judge DUGAN was visibly upset and had a confrontational, angry demeanor. Judge DUGAN addressed Deportation Officer A and asked if Deportation Officer A was present for a court appearance. When Deportation Officer A responded, “no,” Judge DUGAN stated that Deportation Officer A would need to leave the courthouse.

…

Deportation Officer A stated that Deportation Officer A was there to effectuate an arrest. Judge DUGAN asked if Deportation Officer A had a judicial warrant, and Deportation Officer A responded, “No, I have an administrative warrant.” Judge DUGAN stated that Deportation Officer A needed a judicial warrant. Deportation Officer A told Judge DUGAN that Deportation Officer A was in a public space and had a valid immigration warrant. Judge DUGAN asked to see the administrative warrant and Deportation Officer A offered to show it to her. Judge DUGAN then demanded that Deportation Officer A speak with the Chief Judge. Judge DUGAN then had a similar interaction with FBI Agent B and CBP Officer A. After finding out that they were not present for a court appearance and that they were with ICE, Judge DUGAN ordered them to report to the Chief Judge’s office.

…

Deportation Officer A went inside a more private area of the Chief Judge’s office to speak with him on the phone. During their conversation, the Chief Judge stated he was working on a policy which would dictate locations within the courthouse where ICE could safely conduct enforcement actions. The Chief Judge emphasized that such actions should not take place in courtrooms or other private locations within the building. Deportation Officer A asked about whether enforcement actions could take place in the hallway. The Chief Judge indicated that hallways are public areas.

However, Judge Dugan decided that it was now time for her to get down from the bench and actively guide Flores-Ruiz through a non-public door to evade arrest:

The courtroom deputy recalled that upon the courtroom deputy’s return to the courtroom, defense counsel for Flores-Ruiz was talking to the clerk, and Flores-Ruiz was seated in the jury box, rather than in the gallery. . . .

The courtroom deputy then saw Judge DUGAN get up and heard Judge DUGAN say something like “Wait, come with me.”

Despite having been advised of the administrative warrant for the arrest of Flores-Ruiz, Judge DUGAN then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his counsel out of the courtroom through the “jury door,” which leads to a nonpublic area of the courthouse. These events were also unusual for two reasons. First, the courtroom deputy had previously heard Judge DUGAN direct people not to sit in the jury box because it was exclusively for the jury’s use. Second, according to the courtroom deputy, only deputies, juries, court staff, and in-custody defendants being escorted by deputies used the back jury door. Defense attorneys and defendants who were not in custody never used the jury door.

When the team realized that he had escaped, they pursued the suspect and only apprehended him after a chase in the streets of Milwaukee.

What these politicians do not explain is where the line should be drawn if judges can now actively assist in the escape of fugitives or wanted individuals. Could Dugan order court officers to hide Flores-Ruiz? Could she put him in her trunk and drive him out of the courthouse?

Once you leave the bench to assist in alleged illegality, you find yourself on a slippery slope.

This has happened before and, according to judges like Isham, it will happen again.

I previously wrote about the case of Massachusetts judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph who was charged with allegedly helping an illegal immigrant evade ICE agents in April 2018. Joseph and court officer Wesley MacGregor were charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice, obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting and obstruction of a federal proceeding.

I was critical of the handling of the case. While Joseph was suspended for three years, charges were dropped in 2022 during the Biden Administration.

Many of us have called for a deescalation of the rhetoric and conflicts between the judicial and executive branches. We need to maintain respect for our courts even when we disagree with their decisions.

However, that is a mutual obligation. Judges have to maintain such respect by honoring their role as adjudicators rather than accomplices in criminal matters.

As Justice Louis Brandeis stated in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).:

In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means — to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal — would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face.

Hannah Dugan has shown precisely how “contagious” such law breaking can become when judges become “teachers” of a “contempt for law.” She yielded to the temptation to “become a law unto herself.” Frankly, it may be difficult to secure a conviction from a Milwaukee jury, but the Justice Department is seeking to offer a lesson of a different kind in bringing these charges.

343 thoughts on ““This Judge is a Hero”: Democratic Politicians and Judges Praise Judge Dugan and Call for Resistance”

  1. Turley is not a practicing attorney, and he should know better than to speculate and insinuate about an incident he is helping to misrepresent.

    Judge Dugan was correct in assessing the credibility of the administrative warrant. As a judge, she properly asked if there was a judicial warrant, and that question is significant. Additionally, it is false to claim that Judge Dugan intentionally directed Flores-Ruiz to take the jury exit to evade ICE. Turley conveniently omits that the jury exit leads directly to a public hallway where ICE was present, making them fully visible. They had the opportunity to apprehend him but did not take immediate action.

    A judge has the authority to determine where anyone should sit in her courtroom. Judge Dugan’s decision to have Flores-Ruiz sit in the jury box is irrelevant.

    Turley is promoting the misleading narrative that Judge Dugan deliberately tried to assist Flores-Ruiz, which is a blatant lie pushed by the Trump administration and supported by Turley and other right-wing commentators.

    The actual facts of the case will emerge in court, and it will become evident that there is no case against Judge Dugan. This situation is intended to intimidate other judges and smear those on the left as supporters of criminals.

    1. George is not an attorney and has no idea about any aspect of constitutional law. George is a geriatric windbag. Fixed it.

      1. Yes he is an attorney! He got his degree on the Internet! You can tell because all his “legal” arguments are lifted off the Internet!

    3. The courtroom deputy then saw Judge DUGAN get up and heard Judge DUGAN say something like “Wait, come with me.”

      Despite having been advised of the administrative warrant for the arrest of Flores-Ruiz, Judge DUGAN then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his counsel out of the courtroom through the “jury door,” which leads to a nonpublic area of the courthouse. These events were also unusual for two reasons. First, the courtroom deputy had previously heard Judge DUGAN direct people not to sit in the jury box because it was exclusively for the jury’s use. Second, according to the courtroom deputy, only deputies, juries, court staff, and in-custody defendants being escorted by deputies used the back jury door. Defense attorneys and defendants who were not in custody never used the jury door.

      Why does it say this, then?

    4. Apparently the WISC determined that there is enough evidence to warrant Dugan being barred from judging anyone until the process works its way through the courts.

    1. A very simple and effective priciple: heavier penalties for those with power. This works as guidance when formulating legal frameworks for ANY and ALL government employees.

      1. Guidance? Law or policy. In any case, unconstitutional. Keep rattling on silly old fish.

        1. Hardly unconstitutional. Is there a different penalty for deprivation of civil rights when it is done under color of law vs by an average citizen?

          People employed by the various levels of government hold positions of public trust. They have power, in varying degrees, over fellow citizens. Higher standards for behavior and higher penalties for misbehavior are warranted.

        3. Since 1988, Federal Sentencing Guidelines recommend increasing a penalty “If the defendant abused a position of public or private trust, or used a special skill, in a manner that significantly facilitated the commission or concealment of the offense, increase by 2 levels.” (§3B1.3. Abuse of Position of Trust or Use of Special Skill)

          –JJC April 29, 2025 at 9:21 AM

    2. Shock and awe would be the only way to rid Democrats of their cult illness

      1. Since 1988, Federal Sentencing Guidelines recommend increasing a penalty “If the defendant abused a position of public or private trust, or used a special skill, in a manner that significantly facilitated the commission or concealment of the offense, increase by 2 levels.” (§3B1.3. Abuse of Position of Trust or Use of Special Skill)

        –JJC April 29, 2025 at 9:21 AM

    4. Forfeiture of their taxpayer pensions if/when convicted of breaking the very laws and Consitution they’re SUPPOSED to uphold.

  3. In the immortal words of Susan Wild (D-PA): “Do what you know is right and let the law catch up to you.” She left out the part about “and the Dems will decide what’s right”.

  4. Why does JT, a Constitutional lawyer, speculate that a Federal jury in Wisconsin would engage in jury nullification?

    Juries are the bedrock institution of our legal system.

    Turley should either state he expects a jury to decide the case based on the facts and the law — or say nothing. He’s seriously out of his lane to be politicizing jury decisions speculatively — a way of undermining expectations that justice will occur. Rather, a leading legal voice should be expressing confidence the jury will get it right.

    1. If you think Turley is a leading legal voice, I have a bridge for you to look at.

      1. I find it completely amazing that two “anonymi” breathlessly wait for the good professor’s morning post, then pounce. Why are they so eager to read what he writes? If he is so faulty in his handling of topics and news, why would they be so eager to follow him? They certainly could avoid this blog site and move to more credible sites offered by Philip Bump’s personal Substack, Alternet, and others.
        We must ask ourselves, what is motivating them?

        1. Lin,
          Motivating them? Either gross TDS insanity or they are being paid. Either way, they are clearly not very bright and or getting paid way to much for such little thought, intelligence and maturity.

          1. Sadomasochists waiting to be flogged for their illness. No, to them. Give them pity instead.

        2. What’s motivating them is an irrepressible need to be manifest jerks. That’s why they choose anonymity. It would be interesting if one day JT’s blog could host a gathering of all us bloggers. It would be interesting to meet fellow bloggers, especially all these anonymous bloggers if they would have the courage to show their face. Hey, maybe such a gathering could be coordinated with festivities celebrating our founding principles (especially freedom of speech) in 2026, the 250th year of our founding.

        3. They’re contrarian weirdos. That’s why the come to a site that they hate every day.

  5. Judge DUGAN addressed Deportation Officer A and asked if Deportation Officer A was present for a court appearance. When Deportation Officer A responded, “no,” Judge DUGAN stated that Deportation Officer A would need to leave the courthouse.

    If this is true, it is ALL that is needed to bring charges.

    But there is much more.

    But who the f does this “judge” even think she is??? Look at her. The build and looks of a typical white female libtard. And the full on god complex, thinking she owns the courthouse.

      1. He is just channeling Gigi and all her crude comments about WH press secretary Karoline Leavitt who is capable, quick, smart and does not need to read from a binder at every press briefing.

        1. Years ago, I sometimes read comments made by Natacha/Gigi. She often called Trump a “fat slob” or whatever. But she also liked to denigrate Republican women who dye their hair.

          As if that thing that sits on top of Hillary’s head is natural.

      3. I don’t know if he’s judging her on her looks, but a vast majority of lib whackos seen to look like that.

    2. Amen. Dugan and any judge like her (male or female) is a disgrace to the bench and office for which they serve. They serve in a high standard of trust and excellence and should act beyond reproach. She has maintained none and failed. She and again, others like her have cast a dark shadow upon the bench. Support and defend the Constitution of the United States and serve with distinction or give up the gavel.

      I fear something more sinister is being uncovered. Hidden right on the courthouse square.

      1. Yes, the 3 people waiting for justice in the domestic abuse case certainly weren’t equal to Mr. Ruiz, were they?

  6. For context, it might have helped understand the quote Professor Turley references from Justice Brandeis in the Olmstead case had the professor noted that it came from the dissenting opinion of Justice Brandeis. In Olmstead, the majority upheld the warrantless wiretapping of private persons.

  7. Once people learn the facts this new hero of the left will go away the same way you no longer hear about Abrego in El Salvador. Remember “I won’t leave El Salvador until he is released”? Well they left…and he didn’t.

    It is another 80/20 issue and guess what side the Dems are taking!!!

    1. HullBobby,
      It is what they do best. Lie. Gaslight. Leave out relevant facts. Keep repeating the lies for their gullible dupes to follow. This is what amoral fascists do. They believe they are above the law.

      1. For once Upstatefarmer you are right, you described exactly what Trump supporters believe in. It’s like you know them personally.

        1. Too bad for you I was talking about Democrats and you know it. We see their lies, gaslighting, leaving out relevant facts by their words and actions. The good professor just pointed that out. Again.

    2. Here’s the game, facts be damned:

      1) Be first and loudest to establish the narrative du jour.
      2) Make sure complicit media repeats it loudly and regularly.

      Trump is losing the narrative war but there isn’t a lot he can do about it. At least X and Substack have made things slightly better. We have to retweet, share, tell others- keep doing our part.

      Another thing we can do is hold our scoundrel politicians accountable. Our Republican leadership should usethe power of leadership to do likewise. Threaten committee membership, pet projects etc. But sometimes I wonder if they don’t on purpose.

  8. If the facts listed here were reported, more people would understand that she broke the law. Once again, the MSM obfuscates. The all-hailed self righteous person at the WHCD the other night who rightly said the media failed, is still failing!

    1. Would say, facts play no role in what happened. Dems don’t need facts, it s all about the propaganda effect.

  9. By lionizing Dugan and calling for more black-robed rogues to ignore the Constitution by aiding and abetting the unlawful shielding of illegal aliens, the Democrats prove, yet again, that they have forever forfeited any and all claims of right, ability or competence to govern a free people in a constitutional republic. “Forever,” as in: never again.

    2. I’d like to know shero, Ms. Dugan, rationale for not proceeding with the domestic abuse case. The sheriff’s office and chief judge , ICE, FBI, DEA thought that was the plan as did the unconsulted attorney and plaintiffs that were there on schedule. Well ya know it is Dugan’s court and Dugan’s brand of justice.

  10. These zealots suffer from Suicidal Empathy. The zealots should be put down like sick dogs.

    1. Okay, to even think that, you’re willing to state that publicly, then you’re no better than the blood thirsty dems. People like you belong in jail. Typical republican.

      1. Send me to the Gulag for thought crime, eh? GTH

        The Neo-Bolsheviks must be purged, either now or later – why wait?

        Globalists, CCP, Obammaites are all rot and should be removed from any power or influence, that is clear as day.

  11. Now imagine if a judge allowed a person arrested for protesting at an abortion clinic go free or a person charged with a gun crime or even being held for attacking a trans person.

    One thing that seems to be forgotten in the above case is that the two victims of the illegal’s assault were in the courtroom awaiting his trial. What if the now freed illegal criminal went after the two victims in order to eliminate the only known witnesses to his crime? Did the victims receive due process? DId the judge protect the victims? Do liberals care about American victims?

    1. You’re just repeating the news, you have no singular insight into this matter.
      And your what suppositions are childish blabber.

      1. And you have nothing useful to add, so you just go off like a typical libtard

      2. You mean that I am repeating the news as you did every time Trump was accused of something? You mean I am “just repeating the news” when I read an actual charge from the DOJ? Am I repeating the news when I say that the hero of the story was protecting a guy that crossed illegally TWICE and has a deportation order, which actually negates any need for warrants or any further court hearings?

        Keep defending these criminal illegals and the fools that support them, it seems to be working very well for you.

  12. The Dems seem to be telling one and all that every illegal Biden allowed into this country should be allowed to stay in. Gang members, uneducated, or lazy, all from any country, with any beliefs, hating America or loving it, all should stay. Moreover all are welcome. Have we gone “through the looking glass” or found our own twilight zone? The Dems have eclipsed the TDS and have found a new surreal state that even they may not understand.

    1. No!!! People who express thoughts like yours must be imprisoned to save our Democracy. Illegal immigrants are the lifeblood of not only our economy and political system, but our very souls!!! Illegal immigrants not only expand employment in the fields of crime enforcement (including professionals involved in violent attacks, rapes, murders, drug trade and distribution, and so forth), but think of all the medicaid workers in our government and various nonprofit social services agencies that depend upon the flood of illegal immigrants into our great nation!!! And what would happen to our revolving door justice system of judges, clerks, defense attorneys, and all the other members of esteemed legal system that quickly get illegal aliens who have committed crimes by no fault of their own back onto the streets???

      We need to gather together in the very centers of our cities and commit acts of unspeakable violence, including, but not limited to, arson and mass destruction of our cities, for our sacred cause in the name of Saint Floyd to save our Democracy and to stop the Gestapo White Oppressors and Colonialists who have taken over our nation by tricking Americans into voting for them and thus destroying the very fabric of our sacred and holy Democracy!!! Sometimes it is necessary to destroy Democracy to save it. This is one of those instances.

          1. Walter Thompson and UpdateFarmer: agree, exceptional sarcasm and well done. That sums up perfectly how outrageous and unreasonable lefties have become.

      4. If you truly believe in what you have here expressed, why not make yourself known? Make yourself know and stand behind your comment. Can you?

      5. Anonymous 7:25 AM-Such wonderful sarcasm in print. Truly a lost art. Looking for more in the days ahead.

      6. Could you please stop plagiarizing the “Bench” leadership? This rhetoric is very effective. If you examine history you will find it very similar to those tactics used during the evolution of the National German Socialist Workers Party (NSDAP). During THAT “revolution” no one questioned leadership for using the exact tactics against those they identified into categorized “non-masters” — constant repetition is very effective and produces the desired revolution. The popularization and empowerment of hatred, violence, and classification of “those who deserve attack” far surpasses a logical addressing of WHAT should be debated over WHO should be attacked — and assures widespread effectiveness for desired results. The next step is to use labeling (“autocrats” works perfectly), because no one will ever look at exactly what that means and how (or if) it is actually active in use, and then we can take the coveted neighbors’ houses, businesses, and put offenders on trains to “education camps” under the full support and legal “power” of the Judges and DAs funded for the appropriate “social” causes.

  15. Judge Hannah Dugan is a Political Prisoner of the MAGA Gestapo!!! They want to prevent vitally needed illegal immigrants from flooding our nation which would destroy our sacred and esteemed Democracy. Illegal immigrants are the lifeblood of not only our economy and political system, but our very souls!!!

    Illegal immigrants not only expand employment in the fields of crime enforcement (including professionals involved in violent attacks, rapes, murders, drug trade and distribution), but think of all the medicaid workers in our government and various nonprofit social services agencies that depend upon the flood of illegal immigrants into our great nation!!!

    We need to take to the streets and commit acts of unspeakable violence, including, but not limited to, arson and mass destruction of cities, for our sacred cause in the name of Saint Floyd to save our Democracy and to stop the Gestapo White Oppressors and Colonialists who have taken over our nation by tricking Americans into voting for them and thus destroying the very fabric of our sacred and holy Democracy!!!

  16. This continues until people go to prison. Same with all of the corruption for the sake of blocking President Donald J. Trump.

    It should be a category of criminal act, like shoplifting at Walmart, for easy identification.

  20. Thank you professor for bringing the facts to the table for all to see. This judge is no hero. She broke the law. All those who are calling her a hero are aiding and abetting criminal acts and behavior and inciting others to act in criminal conduct. This goes against law and order. This goes against civilized society and the fabric of our nation.

    1. The 4 years of Biden was Welcome to the Hotel California. Seventy seven million voters said no thankyou. Now the dems are singing you can check out any time you like but you can never leave. The thing that this writer is looking for is the evidence backed consensus outcome on the idea that the end game is import the votes you can’t get from We The People to win elections. If that is the end game, what happens to E Pluribus Unum?

Comments are closed.