Judge Hannah Dugan Found Guilty of Obstructing Immigration Agents, Faces Prison Time
“We weren’t trying to make an example out of anyone. This was necessary to hold Judge Dugan accountable because of the actions she took”
As you may know, we have been closely following the case of Judge Hannah Dugan of Wisconsin. Last spring, the judge was arrested after she helped an illegal immigrant escape her courthouse.
Now a jury has found her guilty of obstructing federal immigration officials.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:
Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan found guilty of felony obstruction
Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was found guilty of a felony count of obstructing federal agents seeking to make an immigration arrest outside her courtroom, a precedent-setting case that has been closely watched nationally and drawn passionate protests.
A jury of seven men and five women deliberated more than six hours before delivering a split verdict. They found the judge not guilty on a lesser misdemeanor charge of concealing a wanted person.
The case thrust Dugan, a judge for nine years, into the center of the clash between the judiciary and the Trump administration over its crackdown on illegal immigration.
“We weren’t trying to make an example out of anyone. This was necessary to hold Judge Dugan accountable because of the actions she took,” Interim U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel said. “There’s not a political aspect to it.”
Dugan attorney Steve Biskupic highlighted that the jury delivered a split verdict and the elements between the two counts are the same.
Dugan, 66, showed no emotion as the verdict was read.
“The case is a long way from over,” Biskupic said.
Biskupic said the team would be filing a motion asking Adelman to set aside the conviction, especially based on the split verdict. No sentencing hearing was set.
FOX News has more details:
Following the verdict, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Dugan “betrayed her oath and the people she served.”
“Today, a federal jury of her peers found her guilty and sent a clear message: the American people respect law and order. Nobody is above the law,” he wrote on X. “This Department will not tolerate obstruction, will enforce federal immigration law, and will hold criminals to account — even those who wear robes. Thank you to the men and women who keep us safe. We will always protect you.”
Under Wisconsin law, Dugan is no longer eligible to hold public office.
Here’s a video report from WISN News:
Will she be sentenced to any real prison time? Democrats and the media have assured me that no one is above the law.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Good. Now jail her.
She’ll end up in a good-time house like Allenwood. We can’t have a “your honor” forced to be with… (sniff) common criminals.
Don’t care where she is as long as she is in jail for at least 6 months,
I want her to be forever barred from holding public office again.
Last sentence of article says she is,
State office. No law can prevent her from being elected to Congress or the presidency or vice presidency.
From what I have read, the guidelines are for 22 months with the possibility of extra months for misuse of her position.
The guidelines are only for the serfs. I rather suspect that the time that she had to sit in court at the defendants table will be ruled sufficient.
Subotai Bahadur
A bread and water diet will be good for her.
Less bread.
Kliban bread (“Styro Loaf”).
No jail time although a judge acting like she did should receive the maximum under the law. She will get probation, get barred and never hold public office again
She will get a short period of unsupervised probation, be barred and then another liberal democrat activist Judge will rule that barring her from public office is unconstitutional or whatever lunatic reasoning they come up with, and order that she be reinstated to the court. And that will be the end of it all for Dugan.
Barring her from public office in Wisconsin is in their Constitution but don’t put it past the Dems to try and amend it.
My guess is that her sentence will be dictated by the federal guidelines, but I don’t know what they are.
She is a heroine of the Left. Several judges and lawyers cheered her on. Her life’s bubble was filled with these people. They will double down. She is an AWFUL.
They can commit their own crimes and join her in jail.
Maybe we can trade her for Tina Peters?
Excellent news. This should be a warning to other judges not to pull this stunt. Obey the law. It’s not rocket science.
Living in WI, I am THRILLED she can no longer be a judge.
her oath is to her politics
same way the dems have demanded that the military “oath” is anti maga and that it should be acted upon ( as the judge did) as to turn us more anti maga as possible
Surely all the judges violating the Constitution with their decisions should be able to get some jail time.
I’ll speculate that none of the criminals that graced her court room found their way to the prison system on account of her.
“Democrats and the media have assured me that no one is above the law.”
Except judges. At least in the minds of many other judges who came to her defense spouting legal nonsense. Judges have no immunity for criminal acts– period. As for the jury’s split decision– so what? An obvious compromise. Happens all the time in jury deliberations.
Will the defense appeal? Perhaps, but appeals are for losers, and normally very hard to win. An appellate court will have to come up with a legal error on the part of the presiding judge. Does the Biskupic think that Adelman’s failure to set aside the conviction, based on the split verdict would constitute legal error?
Finally I doubt Dugan will get sentenced to any prison time. I think we will hear something along the lines of “She’s been punish enough.”
I doubt the split verdict could be considered “error.” A jury’s verdict can’t be questioned. The jurors’ decisions are law.
I think that such splits aren’t unusual, as one occurred in the only jury I ever served upon. There were two counts against our defendant. The jury was unanimous is in acquitting her of one count, yet one juror held out for a guilty verdict on the second. He refused to budge even after we pointed out to him that a guilty verdict on that count depended upon her guilt in the other count, upon which he had agreed the defendant was not guilty. There was no logic to his insistence upon guilt in what might be called a “dependent” charge (depending, as it did, upon guilt in the other charge in order to sustain, logically but not legally, the second charge).
The jury’s guilty verdict can be overridden by the trial judge. It’s very rare, but the judge has to basically say that no reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty.
Maybe she can lose weight in prison now… 🙂
dont know
she might be eating a lotta pie
That poses the problem of what should happen to her robe.
1. Donated to the army to make 100 tents
2. Cut up and used to make robes for 15o other judges
3. Use the material to make 399 coats for the homeless
4. ______________________________________________
Put it in the Smithsonian with a plaque stating no one is above the law,
It would have to be vacuum sealed in a clear shrink-wrapped package in order to fit.
4. Cut up her robe to make 375 temporary wind shelters for ice fishing
the case may wind its way up to the supreme court and then the conflict of interest rears its ugly head
would judge(s) rule against her knowing that they too will be subjected to the peasants laws???
I’m not a lawyer, but crowing that she was acquitted on the misdemeanor while glossing over the conviction on the felony sounds like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Can someone here tell me how the argument of “they are nearly the same charge so the jury screwed up” can be a basis for an appeal? To me it seems like the misdemeanor was there in case the jury didn’t want to or couldn’t get agreement on the felony, and it was the weaker charge because she didn’t physically conceal the guy in her chambers or the like.
Would the lawyer have proclaimed, “We’re going to appeal!” if the split verdict had gone the other way? Or is this just a stalling tactic with fundraising thrown in?
her lawyer said that ( same charge) as to influence
I mean if they are the same and she was acquitted of one wellllll then by all means the other was just political
blah blah blah
that garbage is guilty and the only thing left to do is to see which pos exonerates her
“p”:
The very nice thing about her being convicted of:
A) A felony, and
B) One which carries a POSSIBLE sentence of more than a year…
Is that she will lose her civil rights. She will not be able to vote, and she will not be able to possess (even for a millisecond under the left-wing’s interpretation) or purchase a firearm.
IANAL so I’m not sure this is correct. I’m sure someone will swoop in with a correction or clarification. Millhouse? Millhouse? Anyone?
She will be able to vote as soon as her sentence is over.
Federal law prohibits felons from owning firearms, but that law is very probably unconstitutional as applied to nonviolent felonies, and the Supreme Court may soon have no choice but to rule on it.
““We weren’t trying to make an example out of anyone.”
Clearly, Hannah didn’t have the political pull most of her fellow Democrat offenders enjoy.
State judge tried in federal court.
It’s the ones with federal pull that are the major problems anyway.
if they can just stretch out her appeal until trumpy is out of office ,…….
Having watched the trial, one thing leapt out at me. She literally has no defense. None. Not a smidgeon of evidence she isn’t guilty.
It was laughable to watch. Appeal? On what possible basis? They literally have video and audio footage of her conspiring to prevent the arrest of a wanted fugitive. They have eyewitnesses saying she conspired to prevent the arrest. Her defense boiled down to “but I’m a good person.”
Throw the book at her.
I suppose the defense hinged on convincing the judges in pretrial motions that “it isn’t obstruction when a judge does it in a courthouse”
It isn’t murder when Miss Scarlet does in the Conservatory with the Lead Pipe.
Slightly shocked that not a single juror was able to nullify this obviously inhumane and immoral law that says people here illegally can’t stay forever, even with protection of a Judge.
/sarc
The case must have been really bad. Looked open-and-shut, no chance of disputing the facts of the case, only the politics. There will be wailing and gnashing of the teeth on the left.
That wailing and gnashing of teeth is exactly what equality under the law looks like. I love it.
The actions were just too brazen to ignore, good for the members of the Jury for not folding.
They should make her Ghislaine Maxwell’s cellmate and sex slave.
Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment I believe.
Even for someone as evil as Maxwell?
Yeah. If the good wants the benefits of the constitution you have to give it to the most evil too.
I believe she should get the maximum amount of time and lose her law license. I believe what will happen in reality is the Federal Judge on the case will give her no time and do nothing to her law license. Judges protect their own.
Until people start to get sick of the criminals being immediately released with no bail, or after being convicted not being sent to prison and being released to hurt or kill again. When we reach the level that vigilantes start attacking the criminals, Judges, DAs, and police then there may start to be change of behavior of the Left leaning Judiciary.
She deserves it and this could be the first Marxists to go to jail. Hope she is jailed for a long time
An ignorant cow thought judicial immunity meant diplomatic immunity and now she has FAFO’d
(Confidently) assuming the failure of her appeal, I assume that she must be disbarred as a convicted felon. However given her age I doubt if she will really want to practice law after all this is resolved. So for me the question is:
Will she still receive a pension from her work as a Judge? I hope not but suspect she will.
Leave a Comment