A federal judge on Tuesday rejected a motion to dismiss criminal charges against Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping an undocumented immigrant evade federal authorities by escorting him out of her courtroom through a side door.
Dugan’s defense team had argued earlier this summer that the case violated judicial immunity and amounted to federal overreach. In a 27-page order issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman denied the motion.
Dugan was arrested in April on charges of obstruction of justice after allegedly concealing Eduardo Flores-Ruiz — an undocumented immigrant implicated in an assault case — from Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents following a pre-trial detention hearing. A longtime member of the Milwaukee County bench, she faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted on both counts outlined in the indictment.
Video footage from April 18 shows Dugan, in her judicial robes, speaking with federal agents who were present at a pre-trial detention hearing to take Eduardo Flores-Ruiz into custody.
The footage, released by Milwaukee County through an open records request, depicts agents walking down a hallway after being directed through a door by Dugan. Federal prosecutors argue the video demonstrates that Dugan was attempting to divert the agents as they sought to carry out the arrest.
The video also shows Flores-Ruiz and his attorney leaving the courtroom through a restricted exit typically reserved for jurors, shortly after ICE agents exited the building. A federal agent is seen following Flores-Ruiz into an elevator before he later left the premises. Yet another video clip shows Flores-Ruiz running for about a block before being caught by federal agents.
Dugan was arrested a week later and indicted by a grand jury on May 13, according to the criminal complaint. Her attorneys soon moved to dismiss the case, arguing she was protected by judicial immunity.
PLAY:
Adelman’s decision on Tuesday moves the case closer to trial. In his order, he repeatedly cited the findings of U.S. Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph, who had recommended against dismissing the charges.
“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,’” Adelman wrote. “As the magistrate judge noted, the same is true in the bribery prosecutions, concededly valid, where the judges were prosecuted for performing official acts intertwined with bribery.”
