A highly unusual federal criminal trial is now underway involving a sitting judge in Wisconsin accused of interfering with a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrest at her own courthouse.
Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan is facing trial on charges that she obstructed a federal proceeding and concealed an individual to prevent arrest — allegations that stem from an incident in April 2025 when ICE agents came to detain an undocumented immigrant who was in her courtroom on separate charges. KPBS Public Media
What Happened
According to the indictment, ICE agents arrived at the Milwaukee County Courthouse on April 18 to arrest a Mexican national, Eduardo Flores‑Ruiz, who was appearing before Judge Dugan on misdemeanor domestic assault charges. Prosecutors allege that Judge Dugan told officers they needed a warrant and then directed Flores‑Ruiz and his attorney to leave the courtroom through a non‑public side door, potentially helping him avoid federal custody. Flores‑Ruiz allegedly fled briefly outside before being caught and later deported. KPBS Public Media
Dugan pleaded not guilty to the charges and has argued that her actions were part of her judicial duties and that there was confusion over courthouse protocols for immigration enforcement. Her legal team maintains she should be vindicated at trial. KPBS Public Media
The Charges and Stakes
The federal indictment includes:
- Obstruction of a federal proceeding (a felony), and
- Concealing an individual from arrest (a misdemeanor). KPBS Public Media
If convicted, Dugan could face up to six years in prison. KPBS Public Media
The case has been closely watched because it raises complex legal questions about the authority of judges, the limits of judicial immunity, and how far federal immigration enforcement can reach into local courthouses. Courthouse News
Context and Controversy
Federal prosecutors have emphasized that no one — including judges — is above the law when it comes to obstruction of official duties. A federal judge earlier rejected a bid by Dugan to dismiss the case, concluding that immunity did not apply simply because the actions occurred in a courtroom setting. yournews.com
Critics of the prosecution view the case as part of a broader push by the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement strategy, saying it could chill judicial independence. Supporters of the charges argue the legal system must hold public officials accountable if they interfere with federal operations. Reuters
What to Watch Next
With jury selection complete and opening statements expected soon, all eyes are on how the trial unfolds and what it might mean for the relationship between local courts and federal immigration authorities. The outcome could have implications far beyond Wisconsin, especially in debates over immigration enforcement and judicial power in a politically charged era.
