Judge Hannah Dugan had just arrived for work at Milwaukee County Circuit Court on April 18, when she was informed that federal agents were waiting outside her courtroom. They were there to arrest an undocumented man, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who was scheduled to appear before Dugan on a battery charge.
According to federal prosecutors, Dugan stepped out into the hall to question the agents before directing them to the office of the county’s chief judge down the hall. Dugan then allegedly sent Flores-Ruiz out a non-public door in an alleged attempt, authorities claim, to help him evade arrest on immigration violations. One officer who had returned to the hallway — and another who had never left — said in the criminal complaint they spotted the man leaving. Flores-Ruiz was captured outside the court building after a brief foot chase.
Dugan, 65, was arrested by the FBI a week later. She is charged in a two-count indictment with obstruction and concealing an individual to prevent the discovery and arrest of Flores-Ruiz. She has pleaded not guilty, and her lawyers contend she is immune from prosecution for official judicial acts.
Her attorneys have called her arrest “virtually unprecedented and “entirely unconstitutional,” according to court filings.
ABC News has obtained, through a public records request, video from more than two dozen surveillance cameras at the courthouse, capturing the movements of the judge, the plain-clothed agents and the man targeted for arrest. There is no audio on the surveillance footage.
The video is likely to be used by both prosecutors and defense attorneys as evidence in Dugan’s criminal case.
“The video is not conclusive, and I do think it tends to support whatever preconceptions people might have about the case,” said Dean Strang, an attorney for Dugan.
At least seven cameras on the sixth floor — where Dugan’s courtroom is located — captured portions of the relevant events.
Six federal agents, in plainclothes, are seen arriving in staggered pairs shortly after 8 a.m. and staking out positions throughout the hallway. One agent sat directly across from Dugan’s courtroom.
Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, shown during a candidate forum in 2016.
Mike De Sisti/USA Today Network/Imagn Images/Reuters
Dugan arrived through a private entrance to her courtroom at 08:40 a.m., the videos show. Two minutes later, the agents spotted Flores-Ruiz entering Dugan’s courtroom through the main entrance.
The judge is then seen a minute later re-entering the hallway in her judicial robe, speaking to a pair of agents and then directing them and three others down the hall. According to the criminal complaint, the agents told Dugan they had an administrative warrant, typically issued by immigration authorities without sign-off by a court.
Authorities say Dugan allegedly insisted the agents needed a judicial warrant and told them to go see the chief judge about their planned operation. Federal authorities allege that witnesses described Dugan as having “confrontational, angry demeanor” when she approached the federal agents, according to a criminal complaint.
None of the videos released to ABC News shows the inside of Dugan’s courtroom during the few minutes that Flores-Ruiz was there. Prosecutors allege Dugan never called Flores-Ruiz’s case and directed him and his attorney out through a non-public door.
That door, as the videos show, was just a few feet from the main entrance to the judge’s courtroom and led to the same public hallway. One of the agents had never left the spot across from the courtroom. Another had returned from the chief judge’s office prior to Flores-Ruiz’s exit and followed him.
“If you’re predisposed to think that Judge Dugan did something criminal or wrongfully impeded ICE, you can find support for that preconception in the video. It’s not conclusive, but you’ll feel ratified,” Strang said. “If you start from thinking she didn’t do anything criminal, didn’t do anything wrong, you’ll find support for that in the video. For example, she does not appear to be angry. They don’t show her a warrant. The man comes out within a few minutes, ten or 15 feet from where the agents expected him, and two of them see him coming in the hallway.”
Dugan has assembled a high-powered defense team, which includes former United States Solicitor General Paul Clement, and Strang, who came to national prominence as one of the defense attorneys featured in the Netflix docu-series, “Making a Murderer.”
“Even if (contrary to what the trial evidence would show) Judge Dugan took the actions the complaint alleges, these plainly were judicial acts for which she has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. Judges are empowered to maintain control over their courtrooms specifically and the courthouse generally,” her lawyers wrote earlier this month in a motion to dismiss the indictment.
Dugan entered a not guilty plea at a brief court appearance on May 15. She has remained free on her own recognizance and her trial is set for July.
Judge Arrested for Allegedly Helping Undocumented Immigrant: Legal Expert Weighs In
Keywords: Judge Hannah Dugan, immigration violations, judicial immunity, obstruction of justice, undocumented immigrant, Milwaukee, FBI arrest
time.news Editor (TNE): Good morning, Dr. Anya Sharma. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the Hannah Dugan case, a truly complex situation involving a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge arrested by the FBI.The article details the events leading to her arrest – can you briefly recap the situation for our readers?
Dr. Anya Sharma (DAS): Certainly.the core of the issue is that Judge Hannah Dugan is accused of obstructing federal agents who were at the courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented man scheduled to appear on a battery charge. The indictment alleges that she directed the agents to the Chief Judge’s office and then seemingly facilitated Flores-Ruiz’s exit through a non-public door,allegedly to help him evade arrest for his immigration violations. He was apprehended shortly after.
TNE: the charges are serious: obstruction and concealing an individual to prevent finding and arrest. What are your initial thoughts on the legal complexities surrounding this case?
DAS: There are several layers to unpack.Firstly, obstruction of justice charges are often based on a very specific interpretation of intent. The prosecution needs to demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Judge Dugan intended to impede the agents and knowingly helped Flores-Ruiz evade arrest for immigration violations. Secondly, the defense is arguing judicial immunity, stating that her actions, even if true, were part of legitimate judicial acts. This argument is a significant hurdle for the prosecution. Judicial immunity protects judges making decisions within the scope of their duties; it is indeed central to the concept of an autonomous judiciary.
TNE: The presence of surveillance video is intriguing. The judge’s attorney,Dean Strang,suggests it’s open to interpretation,supporting pre-existing views about the case. How significant is this video evidence likely to be in the trial?
DAS: Video evidence can be incredibly powerful, but as Mr. Strang points out, its interpretation is key. The absence of audio is crucial here.A picture may be worth a thousand words, but without sound, we lack context.The prosecution might try to use the video to portray a purposeful act of assistance, showing her directing agents one way while Flores-Ruiz exits another. The defense will likely argue the video shows routine courtroom activity without clear evidence of intent to obstruct. Ultimately,the impact of the surveillance video will depend on how effectively each side presents its narrative.
TNE: The article mentions the agents had an administrative warrant, and Judge Dugan allegedly insisted they needed a judicial warrant. Coudl you explain the difference and its relevance here?
DAS: An administrative warrant, typically issued by immigration authorities, doesn’t require a judge’s sign-off. A judicial warrant, on the other hand, does. The Judge might have requested a proper judicial warrant because she didn’t believe the administrative one sufficed within her courtroom. in the USA, the belief is that the judiciary protects against overreach by those in power. If authorities are making assumptions about people due to their race or ethnicity, it may be more likely that a person would be wrongly targeted. The agents insisting on an arrest with an administrative warrant may be indicative of such over reach. This is a critical point because if the judge reasonably believed the agents lacked proper legal authority, her actions could be argued as protecting the integrity of the court, not obstructing justice. It might very well be that the issue here is the legality of the arrest itself.
TNE: Judge Dugan has assembled what’s described as a “high-powered” defense team,including a former US Solicitor General and Dean Strang,known for his role in the “Making a Murderer” documentary. How might this affect the outcome?
DAS: An experienced and skilled defense team significantly increases a defendant’s chances. It doesn’t guarantee a specific outcome, but it ensures a robust defense, thorough investigation, and effective presentation of their case. Having a former Solicitor General is a substantial advantage, offering deep expertise in constitutional law and strategic legal arguments like judicial immunity. And Strang’s experience with high-profile cases brings significant media management skills to the table. this case may be decided due to public opinion and a highly skilled defense attorney will prepare the best possible defense.
TNE: This case raises critically important questions about the intersection of immigration enforcement, judicial immunity, and the role of judges. What broader implications might it have for the legal system and the public’s perception of it?
DAS: The case is a litmus test. If Judge Dugan is convicted,it could send a chilling effect on judicial independence,making judges hesitant to question the actions of law enforcement agencies,especially in sensitive areas like immigration enforcement. The concern is that judges might be less willing to challenge potential overreach for fear of facing criminal charges themselves. Depending on the ruling, people may be more or less trusting that justice is color blind. A lot is at stake here.
TNE: Dr. Sharma, thank you for your insightful analysis. It will be engaging to watch how this case unfolds.
DAS: My pleasure.
