Judge Dugan’s Bid to Claim Immunity Fails: Criminal Charges Move Forward

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan won’t be able to hide behind her robe. A federal judge has rejected her attempt to dismiss criminal charges by invoking judicial immunity, declaring her actions in shielding a defendant from ICE agents exceeded protected judicial conduct.

The Ruling That Changed Everything

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, weighing Dugan’s motion, concluded that while judges enjoy broad immunity in civil cases, that protection doesn’t extend to criminal prosecution. Adelman emphasized: “There is no basis for granting immunity simply because some of the allegations … could be considered ‘part of a judge’s job.’” He noted the facts—such as directing a defendant through a private courthouse door—went “well beyond her judicial role.” The ruling allows the criminal case, centered on obstruction and concealing a person from arrest, to proceed. A hearing is set for September 3.

The Incident That Triggered It All

On April 18, Judge Dugan presided over a domestic violence hearing for defendant Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who was reportedly undocumented. ICE agents were stationed nearby, prepared to arrest him after the session. Surveillance footage and the indictment say Dugan told agents they needed a judicial warrant, redirected them, and guided Flores-Ruiz and his lawyer out a non-public jury door. Though he fled, ICE later apprehended him outside following a brief foot chase.

Dugan, arrested in April by federal agents, pleaded not guilty to the charges. Her defense argues she acted within her judicial authority, claiming the prosecution overstepped constitutional boundaries and violated state sovereignty.

Judicial Immunity: Fiction or Fortress?

Dugan’s legal team leaned on the 2024 Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States, suggesting similar immunity should shield her. They also filed a strong brief, supported by over 130 retired judges, warning that the prosecution threatened judicial independence and could chill impartial court operations.

But Adelman rejected their arguments. He stressed that the immunity too often invoked in civil suits doesn’t apply to criminal conduct. Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph also recommended dismissing Dugan’s defense and allowing the trial to proceed, flagging the necessity of jury deliberation over the facts.

Political Winds and National Conversation

The case has become a flashpoint in the broader tug-of-war between local courts and federal immigration enforcement. Supporters of Dugan argue the charges are politically motivated, a warning shot at judges who resist ICE operations in state courthouses. Over 150 former judges have condemned the prosecution, calling it “an assault on judicial independence.”

Conversely, federal prosecutors and conservative commentators see the case as essential accountability, warning that allowing immunity for such actions would place judges above the law—a dangerous precedent. As the Department of Justice responded, dismissing the case would open the door for unchecked judicial interference in lawful federal operations.

What Comes Next

With Judge Adelman’s denial of immunity, Dugan’s case heads toward trial. The charges—felony obstruction and misdemeanor concealment—carry up to six years in prison and a $350,000 fine if she’s convicted.

Meanwhile, Flores-Ruiz remains in ICE custody, pending further immigration proceedings. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has suspended Dugan from her duties while the case unfolds.

This unfolding trial may reshape the boundaries of judicial immunity and the tension between judicial discretion and federal law enforcement in politically charged contexts. More than a courtroom drama, it’s a constitutional test with national implications.