In a courtroom drama shaking Milwaukee, Judge Hannah Dugan has firmly rejected federal accusations that she hindered the arrest of a migrant outside her chambers. The charges claim Dugan deliberately obstructed immigration agents and concealed Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a man wanted on an immigration hold, by steering him away from law enforcement and out a secret exit.
This isn’t just a local legal tussle—it’s a flashpoint in the wider clash over immigration enforcement under the Trump administration. Dugan, who’s been a circuit court judge since 2016 and built her career defending vulnerable communities, pled not guilty through her attorney during a brief hearing.
Outside the courthouse, a chorus of protesters rallied in her support, waving flags upside down as a symbol of national distress and chanting “hands off Judge Dugan.” Meanwhile, federal prosecutors are pushing forward, setting a trial date for July 22.
Dugan’s defense hinges on judicial immunity, arguing that her actions fall within her official duties and that the federal case encroaches on state sovereignty. Her lawyers have labeled the prosecution as unprecedented and unconstitutional.
The controversy erupted after agents planned to arrest Flores-Ruiz, who was facing assault charges and had previously been deported. According to the indictment, Dugan intervened by misleading federal agents and escorting Flores-Ruiz through a concealed jury exit to avoid his detention. Yet, Flores-Ruiz was eventually spotted, chased, and arrested outside the courthouse.
This case underscores the growing tension between federal immigration enforcement and local judicial discretion, spotlighting the collision of law, politics, and human stories in today’s immigration battles.
