We have been diligently following the case of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, who was arrested and then indicted for allegedly helping an illegal alien escape from ICE, which, by the way, if true, is a federal crime:
Judge Dugan was indicted for potentially committing the following federal crimes.
The first, 18 U.S.C. § 1071 – Concealing person from arrest, states: “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.”
The second, 18 U.S.C. § 1505 – Obstruction of Proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees, states: “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…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.”
Here she is leaving the federal courthouse after her initial appearance on federal criminal charges:
The facts as they have been reported seem to show that Dugan did indeed attempt to help an illegal alien evade arrest by ICE, and did corruptly obstruct the arrest of the illegal alien which was being carried out through “the due and proper administration of the law.” But maybe the reporting is wrong? Or not.
Since I was a career law clerk for a federal district court judge for 2 1/2 years and handled dozens, if not hundreds, of federal criminal cases, I thought I would take a peek at the criminal docket in Dugan’s case and see if there was anything interesting or noteworthy.
Is there ever!
First, there is an interesting document Dugan filed called her “DISCLOSURE STATEMENT,” and in it, she discloses that FOUR, yes, count’em, FOUR law firms are “appearing, expected to appear, or who may appear” to represent Dugan during her criminal proceedings. That is a new one on me — never seen a federal criminal defendant represented by four law firms. Wow!
You can review Dugan’s Disclosure Statement here.
In case you are interested, the four law firms representing Dugan are Steven Biskupic Law Office LLC of Thiensville, Wisconsin, Clement & Murphy, PLLC of Washington, D.C., Strang Bradley, LLC of Madison, Wisconsin, and Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
And, after filing that, Dugan’s defense team filed SEVEN, yes SEVEN official Notices of Attorney Appearance, three of whom are named partners in the above four law firms.
Yes, you heard that right — Dugan is being represented by SEVEN lawyers.
You can review the docket here if you’d like. I’ve never seen anything like that before either. Most federal criminal defendants make use of the federal public defenders office and get one grossly overworked and underpaid attorney to represent them.
Another interesting item is the Court’s “Order Setting Conditions of Release,” which you can review here. The interesting thing about this document is that other than the “form” conditions of release (i.e. don’t commit any other crimes, cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample, etc.), there are no other conditions of release specified — NONE. I’ve never seen that either — usually the judge puts some other conditions down — where the federally indicted defendant will be staying while on release, where they are allowed to go, what they can or must do, etc. And that’s if the defendant is even released at all in the first place! Here — NOTHING! Not sure what that means, but I hope it doesn’t mean anything.
Finally, we have Dugan’s Motion to Dismiss the case, which you can review here.
I am not going to dissect the Motion to Dismiss, except to note that it is signed by six lawyers from three law firms and was filed ONE DAY after Dugan was indicted. How seven lawyers drafted, reviewed, got Dugan’s review done, and filed this thing in one day is something I cannot conceive of, but all I can say is that it is noteworthy.
And you will see upon review that the gist of the Motion to Dismiss is that “the government cannot prosecute Judge Dugan because she is entitled to judicial immunity for her official acts.”
Further: “Even if…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.”
So helping an illegal alien escape from ICE is “maintain[ing] control over [her] courtroom” — okay.
Here is what the esteemed Jonathan Turley thinks of this argument:
More on Turley’s reasoning:
Some other X commentary:
We will update this post once the court rules on Dugan’s Motion to Dismiss.
As of now, her trial date is set for July 22, 2025, but that will almost certainly NOT be when the trial happens, as there is evidence to gather, transmit to the other side, review, the Motion to Dismiss to rule on, etc., etc., but it could happen later this year or early in 2026. We will keep you posted.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY