Federal Grand Jury Indicts Wisconsin Judge Who Allegedly Helped Illegal Try To Evade ICE
“knowingly concealed E.F.R., a person for whose arrest a warrant and process had been issued under the provisions of a law of the United States, so as to prevent the discovery and arrest of E.F.R.”
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested for allegedly helping an illegal alien sought by ICE try to avoid capture by letting him out of the courtroom through a private exit to the hallway.
Just NOW, the FBI arrested Judge Hannah Dugan out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin on charges of obstruction — after evidence of Judge Dugan obstructing an immigration arrest operation last week.
We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the subject to be…
— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) April 25, 2025
New video from our crews: Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan and her attorney leaving the federal courthouse in Milwaukee and not commenting. The FBI arrested her at the MKE Co Courthouse this morning. She's charged with 2 felonies for obstructing an ICE arrest last week pic.twitter.com/3YtgsNHTJl
— Matt Smith (@mattsmith_news) April 25, 2025
Democrats quickly forgot their “no one is above the law” mantra they repeated endlessly against Trump.
Now the Judge has been indicted by a federal grand jury:
The Wisconsin judge arrested last month and accused of helping an undocumented immigrant evade federal agents was indicted by a federal grand jury on Tuesday on charges of concealing a person from arrest and obstruction of proceedings….
The indictment was announced during a short hearing on Tuesday evening at the federal courthouse in downtown Milwaukee. After 20 members of a grand jury entered a wood-paneled courtroom and took their seats, a judge examined paperwork and indicated that Judge Dugan, along with other defendants in unrelated cases, had been indicted.
Judge Dugan’s transformation from a little-known local jurist to a face of the national immigration debate began on April 18 with a pretrial hearing in a domestic abuse case against Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican immigrant.
Several federal officials from different agencies had gathered in the hallway outside Judge Dugan’s courtroom and had planned to arrest Mr. Flores-Ruiz, who they said was in the country illegally, after his court appearance. The federal agents had told courthouse security officers and the judge’s courtroom deputy about their plans, according to an F.B.I. charging document.
When Judge Dugan became aware of the federal agents, the charging document said, she became “visibly upset and had a confrontational, angry demeanor.” According to the criminal complaint, the judge confronted the agents and told them to talk to the chief judge of the courthouse. She then returned to her courtroom and, according to the charging document, directed Mr. Flores-Ruiz through a different exit than the public door that led to the hallway where agents were waiting.
From the Indictment:
COUNT ONE
On or about April 18, 2025, in the State and Eastern District of Wisconsin,
HANNAH C. DUGAN
knowingly concealed E.F.R. a person for whose arrest a warrant and process had been issued
under the provisions of a law of the United States, so as to prevent the discovery and arrest of
E.F.R., after notice and knowledge of the fact that a warrant and process had been issued for the
apprehension of E.F.R.In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1071.
COUNT TWO
On or about April 18, 2025, in the State and Eastern District of Wisconsin,
HANNAH C. DUGAN
did corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct, and impede the due and proper administration of
the law under which a pending proceeding was being had before a department and agency of the
United States, namely the administrative arrest of E.F.R. for purposes of removal proceedings
conducted by the United States Department of Homeland Security, by committing affirmative
acts to assist E.F.R. to evade arrest, including:a. confronting members of a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) Task Force and falsely telling them they needed a judicial wanant to
effectuate the arrest of E.F.R.;
b. upon learning that they had an administrative warrant for E.F.R.’ s arrest, directing
all identified members of the ICE Task Force to leave the location of the planned
arrest (a public hallway outside of Courtroom 615 of the Milwaukee County
Courthouse) and go to the Chief Judge’s office;
c. addressing E.F.R.’s Milwaukee County Circuit Court criminal case off the record
while ICE Task Force members were in the Chief Judge’s office;
d. directing E.F.R. and his counsel to exit Courtroom 615 tluough a non-public jury
door; and
e. advising E.F.R.’s counsel that E.F.R. could appear by “Zoom” for his next court
date.In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1505.
=================
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
A good start!
Do you mean that an indictment is a good start and then comes a trial?
Or do you mean that indicting one person is a good start on indicting everyone who does this? The problem with that is that there’s no evidence anyone else is doing this.
The only similar incident known to have happened was that judge in Massachusetts a few years ago, but the charges against her were dropped because she didn’t know that ICE was there looking for the guy. He only told her that he was in the country illegally, and ICE was in the building checking people’s IDs, so he was nervous going out in the public areas and running into them. So she didn’t knowingly obstruct ICE; what she did was more like helping someone avoid a drunk driving checkpoint.
More like cop helping a criminal to evade a search.
When a motorists warns a fellow motorist about a checkpoint, that’s free speech. When a cop does it, it’s interference with a law enforcement operation.
She’s not a cop. She had no more duty to assist ICE than did any random person. She had the same duty as any random person not to knowingly assist someone to evade arrest; any random person who acted as she did would be arrested too, and would be facing the same charges.
You must admit that it’s rather a bad look for an officer of the court.
Also, I would like to note that I don’t believe that “any random person” swears an oath to faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
So then, it’s NOTHING like one citizen helping another avoid a drunk driving checkpoint.
Thanks for begrudgingly clearing that up.
What a buncha BS. While I’m not fully familiar with the details of the case you are referencing, your description implies the judge in MA, like the one in WI, made use of their ability to access non-public areas of the courthouse to aid in the escape of a person in the country illegally. She didn’t just inform him of the presence of ICE agents. The fact that she didn’t know specifically that he had a warrant should be irrelevant, she obviously assumed that ICE would take him into custody by her actions.
She took an oath to uphold the laws of her state and the United States.
She’s an officer of the court, represents the justice system, and therefore does have a higher duty to uphold law enforcement instead of undermining it.
She had no more duty to assist ICE than did any random person.
Bullcarp, Milhouse! She’s a sworn officer of the court.
Hodge, it may be a bad look, but it wasn’t illegal, while what this judge did was.
An oath of office does not create legal obligations that the person didn’t have before.
(Incidentally, neither judge is covered by the law you cited, since it’s a federal law and applies only to “each justice or judge of the United States”. Neither of these two judges are that. But it’s irrelevant, since state law required them to take similar oaths.)
Henry Bowman, yes, what the MA judge did is exactly like that, which is why the charges against her were dropped, and why this case is the very first time any judge has been caught knowingly frustrating an arrest.
Christopher B, there is no law against helping someone avoid attracting the notice of law enforcement. The MA judge, like anyone else, had no duty to alert law enforcement to the presence of a lawbreaker. What makes this case different is that the offender knew the authorities were there to arrest the person, and she knowingly helped him escape. That is a crime, whether it’s done by a judge or by anyone else.
Ahad, CapitalistDad, and GWB, an oath does not create legal obligations that don’t apply to everyone. An officer of the court is not required to assist law enforcement. Everyone, however, is required not to knowingly interfere with an arrest.
One of the most absurd comments of the day, and there is room for more.
So, an oath creates no legal obligations? An oath is totally meaningless under the law? Maybe this is true, but if it is, let’s say it outright. It’s just meant to create the perception of an obligation.
Honest question. Does an oath create any legal obligation at all? Some oaths? No oaths?
She’s a judge. She does have a higher duty to enforce the law, and especially not to help criminally violent illegal aliens evade law enforcement. All of us lawyers do.
In point of fact she is more than likely “a cop”. Your Humble Servant is a retired Commissioned Peace Officer in Colorado. Under our laws, and likely in most states, there are multiple Classes of Peace Officer. A Class One Commissioned Peace Officer here is an elected official as specified in statutes and the state Constitution, or an officer of the Courts who has taken the oath to uphold the law and Constitution. As such they have full arrest power as any other law enforcement officials.
Our Class Two A Commissioned Peace Officers are local cops and county deputies who have a positive duty and power to enforce the law the same as other law enforcement officials do.
Our Class Two B Commissioned Peace Officers are State law enforcement officials who have the same power and duties to enforce the law. That is what I did for almost 3 decades.
Our Class Three Commissioned Peace Officers are State law enforcement officials who have limited powers and duties, as laid out in statutes, to enforce specialized branches of the law.
Dugan would be the equivalent of a Class One Commissioned Peace Officer here, and have the duties and powers thereof.
Subotai Bahadur
And there he is…. Ever the idiot. Anybody surprised Dolthouse is rah rahing for a corrupt judge with no respect or understanding of the law… kinda just like him ..,
This right here IS evidence it is happening 😂😂
The problem here is that this SHOULDNT be happening but it is and the fact it is is not a surprise to anyone capable of rubbing two or more functioning brain cells together.
No, it is not evidence of that. One swallow doesn’t make a spring. One judge committed a crime, and was immediately arrested for it. That is no basis for assuming that there are other judges committing the same crime and getting away with it.
That thing you morons keep swearing isn’t happening keeps on happening 😂😂
mailman, on what basis do you claim it keeps on happening? There is no evidence of it happening, so you are just guessing. I could just as easily guess that you are committing some crime or other.
This is a crime that has never before been observed to happen. This is the first time. And the criminal is going to trial.
Yes, to your former assertion: “This indictment is a good start, and then comes a trial.” Judge Dugan is entitled to a fair trial.
But it is also clear that many people view this indictment as sending a strong message to activists and liberal judges that no one is above the law (including themselves) and their role is to follow the law.
Defend your comrades, Democrat.
As you always do.
This judge violated the oath she took when she became a judge.
But what would the party of oathbreakers, slaveholders and terrorists care for that?
Fuck off, liar.
The problem with that is that there’s no evidence anyone else is doing this.
Actually, there have been a few notable incidents in the media over the last several years. It is not true that “no one else” is doing this.
What “notable incidents”? I’ve never heard of even one. Please cite some.
Don’t expect people to spoon-feed you information. Show some initiative and find it for yourself.
Top secret, it doesn’t exist. You are the one claiming that it does, so produce it.
Fuzzy logic. Warning drivers of a DUI checkpoint is informing drivers of a state activity in progress. Free speech all the way because the police are targeting the public at large.
However, if the police are targeting a PARTICULAR PERSON and you assist that person by either verbal warning or active assistance to avoid the police, then you are obstructing. It is not free speech.
What the MA judge did — if the facts are accurate as portrayed — is distracting the police at a DUI checkpoint so you can help a friend who is behind you. Obstruction all the way, especially if you know he is drunk.
You have completely missed the point. The charges against the MA judge were dropped precisely because she did NOT know that the police were targeting the person she helped. That is what made her action not a crime. The WI judge did know that the officers were there for this person, and knowingly helped him escape. That is why she has been indicted and will probably be convicted and receive a criminal sentence.
Your description of the MA situation makes it seem to me that the charges were dropped by the state because the defendant was a judge. Any juror would have convicted because you can’t “help” someone unless you know they need it. If the judge did anything out of the ordinary that allowed a suspect to avoid arrest, her intent would have been to help the suspect avoid arrest, whether she knew what LE intended or not. Her intent can be inferred from her actions. (And it’s a logical assumption that if LE shows up for someone, they’re there to arrest them, not to take them to brunch.)
Police show up. Someone assists a certain individual (and not any other individual or everyone present) to avoid them. Ordinary citizens have been successfully prosecuted on the inference such a situation creates.
Dave, that is just not true.
She did not know ICE was there looking for this guy. His lawyer approached her and said that ICE was in the building questioning people, and he was worried about running into them, so could he please go out a different exit to avoid attracting their attention. If they had not been looking for him helping him avoid them is like helping someone drive around a checkpoint; the person is not a fugitive, so there is no crime in helping him. Unbeknownst to her, ICE knew he was in the building and had come there specifically to arrest him, so she was arrested and charged, until she explained her mistake and the charges were dropped.
In this case she had no such excuse. She knew they were looking for him, because they told her. And she knowingly obstructed them by helping him evade them. That makes her a criminal, who is likely to do prison time.
I’m sure that when the illegal told the judge he was “worried about running into them,” the judge naturally assumed he feared their cologne would set off his allergies.
Yes.
Yes, clear statement and warning to those liberal, activist judges on the bench that there are limits to what they can do in their courts and in the courtroom building and that violation of the law will have consequences. Nobody is above the law, right? The short answer being, if they FA then they are going to FO. Simple as that.
But what makes you think that any of them are even thinking of committing a crime like this?
What makes you think theyaren’t thinking of committing a crime like this. If we let one liberal, activist judge get away with violating the law as Dugan did, then that only encourages other liberal, activist judges on the bench to do the same when it comes to illegals in their courtroom. And don’t kid yourself, there are plenty of democrat, liberal activist judges on the bench that would do this if they knew they would never be held accountable for their acts and actions.
Why would you start with an assumption that judges are criminals, and are committing crimes and going undetected, without a shred of evidence??? One judge commits a crime, is immediately caught and arrested, and suddenly the whole judiciary is a nest of criminals?! That’s not how it works.
After years of judges bending, breaking, misapplying, and ignoring the law just to “get Trump,” what makes you think that judges aren’t willing to break the law?
Dave, because the default assumption is always the null assumption. The onus of proof is always on the person asserting that something is happening, not on the person doubting it. That’s how it works.
There were witnesses to her confrontation with the ICE agents. She was heard asking them if they had a “valid” warrant. They replied in the affirmative. She then asked what kind of court issued it, and they told her an immigration court. If I recall correctly, she then made a dismissive comment about a warrant from an administrative court. She not only knew they were ICE agents, she knew what they were there for. She allowed her righteous indignation to the get the better of her legal skills, making a mistake that will bury her.
Who are you talking about now? Keep your characters straight. You are now talking about Dugan, the WI judge, whose charges have not been dropped and are not going to be dropped. She’s going down, because she knowingly committed a crime. The MA judge had her charges dropped, because she did not knowingly commit a crime. This is the first time a judge has been caught doing this, and very likely the first time a judge has done it. It’s hard to do this and not get caught.
Now send this bovine buffoon to Leavenworth.
Wow, the way this rather large woman came flying outta that side door, bee-lining to the car door and hurling her considerably-sized frame onto the back seat, almost lead me to think, “Could this lefty actually have a sense of shame and embarrassment at her current predicament?”
Naahhhh, impossible. Remember, she’s a lefty,
https://images3.memedroid.com/images/UPLOADED436/588d5b727f7ee.jpeg
Watch out, Justice Milhouse will tell you that this is not evidence of her feeling shame 😂😂
She’s ashamed at being caught. I’m sure she’s not ashamed of the crime she committed.
Most of us just refer to him as Justice I can google crap
FAFO Honey!
Step 1 Arrest completed
Step 2 Indictment completed
Awaiting Step 3
“Profit?”
According to her attorneys she looks forward to proving her innocence in court. Seems to me that’s code for “ can we talk about a plea?”.
It’s open and shut, and someone in such a position of responsibility should get no break. Bring it to trial. If she wants it over quickly she can plead guilty to the charges in the indictment.
I can’t wait to hear her defense since an entire courtroom of people watched her antics including the victims of the perp. I wonder if she has the same lawyer as Diddy.
My suspicion is that just as no DC jury will ever convict a Dem politician / operative, she’s hoping that a Milwaukee jury will similarly exercise jury nullification.
Her problem with that strategy is that federal jury pools for EDWi / Milwaukee Division aren’t drawn exclusively from deep-blue Milwaukee — the jury pool will be of people from what’s roughly the SE quarter of the state.
I hope the feds fry her, and then she gets disbarred.
And the fact she interrupted the victims’ (and the state’s) opportunity at justice should get her a “deprivation of civil rights under color of authority” slam, IMO.
There is no civil right to “justice”. Thus she didn’t deprive them of a right. She is a common criminal, but that isn’t one of her offenses.
They say a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich and here’s a woman with a face that looks like a ham sandwich. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
I think I’ve been put off ham sandwiches for a few months now.
I find myself a little bit surprised. I really didn’t believe that this libtards in Milwaukee County would indict that Criminal
Milwaukee County has nothing to do with it. The grand jury would have been drawn from all the counties in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Actually, just from the Milwaukee Division of EDWi, which amounts to roughly the SE quarter of the state.
Get wrecked, sh*tlib r*tard.
Dammit Felix – argue facts or at least opinions. Otherwise, you’re just wasting time and pixels. There’s plenty to disagree with but calling people names doesn’t prove them wrong…
There will be no trial as she will reach a plea deal. She will maintain her innocence but voluntarily step down to spend time with her family and pursue other goals.
Maybe. I wouldn’t rule it out completely but I suspect the DoJ is gonna want her to elocute to every aspect and get the max sentences which could then be suspended other than a token 30 days in prison. Too important a point here to fumble away the opportunity to deliver an object lesson that this sort of misdirection of ICE by officials that seeks to assist evasion or non detection of illegal Aliens is in fact a crime.
Ty Mr Chief.
If (big if) there is a trail, of any kind, that would be great. Whatever the outcome, we have learned that the process is the punishment. She may get a slap on the wrist, she may walk, but at least she will have to face the court.. That is the best I can hope for.
We have also be told time and time again by the democrats that, “Nobody is above the law.” so democrats shouldn’t have a problem with the indictment and subsequent trial.
Could be your right but I’m not holding my breath
Oh I fully admit I could be way off base here. The US Attorney might be a flake, the assigned Federal Judge could be sympathetic, the jury could be a bad draw for a prosecution. All that will play into the calculus of how hard to go. I still maintain that the value of a very clear example of serious consequences being applied to this sort of thing is too important not to get, at minimum, elocute to the crimes, long suspended sentence(s) consecutive not concurrent and 30 days in prison. It is entirely possible that the DoJ will fumble away the opportunity.
It’s OK. The process is the punishment.
^^^ THIS ^^^
This is the game the Dims have been playing, and they need to get it back, long and hard, until they tire of the game. Throw sand on it and pound away.
Beautiful. Make the Dim government officials rue the day they decided to let the genie out of the bottle.
This is a good start and certainly sends the right message, but I would like to see them go after every single one of them that have been under suspect of doing this, and catch them doing it in the act, the same way that they did this one, and then do like the Navy SEALS to when they engage the enemy, ‘Prosecute, prosecute, prosecute….’!
She’s too stupid to be a judge. She might want to try Congress.
Excellent.
pour encourager les autres
Please Mr. Jacobson, words have meaning. You wrote “a pretrial hearing in a domestic abuse case against Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican immigrant.”
The word ‘immigrant” denotes an individual legally moving from one country to another simply looking for a better life. In this case the “immigrant” was an illegal alien (the legal definition) criminal.
I am also disgusted that this female judge chose TDS over protecting another woman from domestic violence. I hope she is disbarred.
No, it does not. It simply means a person who has moved his residence into a country, by any means and for any reason.
The word itself doesn’t, but without the adjective “illegal” before it, it suggests “legal.” (Although we might also say “legal immigrant” to make the distinction, I think our history as a country of immigrants tends to lead us to presume “legal” when “immigrant” stands alone, as we absorbed great waves of legal immigrants and don’t commonly use the adjective “legal” to describe these people.) All foreigners in the country are “aliens,” yet we almost never use that term to describe legal immigrants, because the word is so closely associated with those illegally in the country. The same is true of “immigrant.” Unmodified, it is closely associated with those “aliens” in the country legally (and permanently, I might add, as not all foreigners in the country are “immigrants” because they don’t all intend to stay).
No, it doesn’t suggest “legal”, just as “driver” doesn’t suggest “legal driver”. The majority of immigrants came her legally, just as the majority of drivers do so legally. But a minority of drivers are illegal, and so are a minority of immigrants.
Let’s see what she’s facing. USC 18, 1071 says:
“Whoever harbors or conceals any person for whose arrest a warrant or process has been issued under the provisions of any law of the United States, so as to prevent his discovery and arrest, after notice or knowledge of the fact that a warrant or process has been issued for the apprehension of such person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; except that if the warrant or process issued on a charge of felony, or after conviction of such person of any offense, the punishment shall be a fine under this title, or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.”
And then we’ve got USC 18, 1505:
“Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.”
If “EFR” is facing felony charges (I don’t know) or his gang affiliation is deemd to be domestic terrorism (unlikely) she’s looking at a maximum sentence of 5 to 8 years. On t’other hand if he’s just being jugged for domestic abuse and illegal entry, she’s only looking at a 1 year to 5 year stretch.
Having read the affidavit of the federal officer involved, and having it corroborated by every witness there, a conviction SHOULD be a slam-dunk. But of course her fellow collectivist judge(s) will probably decide to give her a pass. With a federal jury trial in that area her defense attorneys will almost certainly be able to find a witless idiot to put on the jury to hang it from conviction.
I don’t see her doing a plea under those conditions. As with the old Monty Python sketch of a wife finding her husband in bed with another woman, they’ll just keep repeating the mantra “What woman?” until she’s acquitted.
Thanks for looking up the details of the laws that we’re. broken by this judge. This means that every democrat that allowed the invasion and then protection of alien criminals should be indicted and prosecuted. That would eliminate the entire democrat/communist party. They are all guilty/complicit of aiding and abetting criminals. Murderers,drug trafficking,human trafficking,sex trafficking,theft, other crimes too numerous to mention here.. The democrat party has become a geo political barbarous criminal movement that needs to be eliminated. Don’t vote democrat. There is nothing democratic about the democrat party.
No, it doesn’t. Comprehending simple English does not seem to be your forte. Read the statute, as quoted, and it’s obvious that they have not done the thing described.
she aided a foreign agent