Federal grand jury indicts Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan in ICE case

[Jilly_in_VA]

A federal grand jury indicted a Wisconsin judge on May 13 on charges that she tried to assist an undocumented immigrant escape arrest from her courtroom last month, putting her at the center of the growing dispute between President Donald Trump and the judicial system.

The two-page indictment accuses Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, 66, of obstructing a U.S. agency and concealing an individual to prevent an arrest. The two charges carry a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine, but sentences in cases involving nonviolent offenses typically are much shorter.

Dugan is expected to enter a plea at a May 15 hearing.

"As she said after her unnecessary arrest, Judge Dugan asserts her innocence and looks forward to being vindicated in court," Dugan's defense team said in a statement.

The indictment came after a string of witnesses entered the federal courthouse throughout the day on May 13 to testify before the grand jury. Among those making appearances were Alan Freed Jr., Dugan's court clerk, and Mercedes de la Rosa, the attorney for Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, the undocumented immigrant at the center of the case. De la Rosa has withdrawn from his case.

Also giving testimony was Milwaukee County Judge Kristela Cervera, a misdemeanor judge whose courtroom is next to Dugan's. She arrived and left with defense attorney Michael F. Hart. Cervera, Hart, and Freed declined to comment.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/05/13/hannah-dugan-grand-jury-wisconsin-judge-indicted/83610034007/

WTF? That was awfully damn quick and stinks of corruption and a carefully packed "grand jury".

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Really. Grand juries should be laughing this stuff out the door. /nt

[Basso8vb]

2. Bullshit

Complete fucking bullshit.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

3. Some grand juries will indict a ham sandwich

This indictment looks weak

Link to tweet

[EdmondDantes_]

10. It's just the prosecutor's side and doesn't have to be unanimous

It would have been a surprise to me if the grand jury didn't indict her

[LetMyPeopleVote]

4. Paul Clement Joins Arrested Milwaukee Judge's Legal Team

Clement will have fun with this weak case

Link to tweet

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/paul-clement-joins-arrested-milwaukee-judges-legal-team

Conservative litigator Paul Clement has joined the legal team representing Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan (D), who was arrested last week for allegedly helping a migrant evade federal immigration officers.

Clement, who’s participated in more than 100 US Supreme Court arguments, is joining a defense anchored by Steven M. Biskupic, the former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Together, the two Wisconsin natives will take on lawyers from Biskupic’s former office. They’re joined by lawyers from Milwaukee firms Mastantuono Coffee & Thomas SC and Gimbel Reilly Guerin & Brown.

Clement, the former US Solicitor General known for representing conservative causes and groups such as the National Rifle Association, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

He is representing WilmerHale, which is suing the Trump administration over an executive order targeting the firm. His representation is one a several high-profile rebuffs to the administration’s executive orders seeking to reign in international law firms the president perceives as political foes.

Federal prosecutors allege Dugan concealed an unlawful migrant and obstructed officers when she allegedly steered the man—who was present for a hearing on domestic violence charges—and his lawyer into a private hallway, away from officers seeking to arrest him. Dugan, who was re-elected to a six-year term in 2022, faces up to six years in prison, prosecutors said during her initial appearance Friday before Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Dries.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

5. Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan has filed a motion to dismiss, saying judicial acts are immune from prosecution

This is a fun filing because is cited the SCOTUS trump immunity case

Link to tweet

Here is a link to the filing
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.111896/gov.uscourts.wied.111896.15.0.pdf

[Jilly_in_VA]

6. When do we get a grand jury indicting Kash Patel?

He spends most of his time, reportedly, playing (attending sports events and partyng in clubs, not to mention cutting briefings to once or twice per WEEK) rather than doing the job he was assigned to do.

[Ms. Toad]

7. As someone said in another thread -

As a general rule, you can indict a ham sandwich. It is a one-sided procedure. The defendant does not get to present evidence or cross-examine the witnesses, so the grand jury hears a carefully selected collection of evidence and arguments.

As to timing - once an arrest is made, the right to a speedy trial kicks in. Grand jury must (generally) be filed within 30 days, and the trial must (generally) begin in 70 days from the indictment.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

8. What do you think the chances are this gets dismissed based on the motion?

I’m not even an attorney and I know judges get a wide latitude (plus certain immunity) on how to conduct their courtroom. You step into their courtroom you step into their fiefdom - my attorney buddies say the real tyrants get “robe fever.”

[Ms. Toad]

11. Tough call.

I know enough about most areas of the law to be dangerous - some I know enough to be effective. (I practiced civil law - primarily contract and IP) and I taught everything that is on the bar exam (about 21 subjects - which includes criminal law and procedure). I'm most effective where there is a teaching/practice overlap. Criminal law is one where I know enough to be dangerous, since most of my experience is in the teaching arena.

So take this with a grain of salt.

This is a political prosecution - like Hunter Biden, so they aren't likely going to accept any of the early out options via a plea bargain - so it would be a judgment call by the judge. They aren't likely to have any prosecution good will. The affirmative defense of immunity can be the basis for granting a motion to dismiss before the trial starts. But this is a criminal charge, not a civil one, so immunity isn't likely. Parlor tricks by the judge's counsel, aside, the Supreme Court decision about immunity for official acts by the president isn't likely to carry much weight. Maybe a directed verdict - but that would more likely be at the end of the feds case.

Based on a handful of reported cases (I didn't review the judge's entire record), Judge Adelman seems fair, and inclined to be skeptical of government and corporate overreach.

But - whatever happens at the trial level, I would expect issues to be appealed to the extent they can by both sides (double jeopardy, after the empanelment of a jury, might prevent some government appeals).

Bottom line - I wouldn't hold my breath for a decision before trial.

[Meowmee]

9. Terrible

I presume this will be appealed.