Trial of Wisconsin Judge Sparks Debate Over Immigration and Judicial Independence

Overview of the Trial

The trial of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan has entered a critical phase as she prepares to present her defense against federal charges of obstruction and concealment. The case stems from an incident on April 18, 2025, when Dugan allegedly intervened to prevent federal agents from arresting Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a 31-year-old Mexican national in the U.S. illegally. The prosecution claims that Dugan’s actions not only hindered the arrest but also showcased the growing tensions between judicial independence and federal immigration enforcement.

Details of the Allegations

Prosecutors argue that Dugan intentionally obstructed a federal immigration task force’s efforts to apprehend Flores-Ruiz, who had been arrested on state battery charges. The trial, which began with testimonies on December 15, 2025, has seen agents recount how they were prepared to arrest Flores-Ruiz outside Dugan’s courtroom. Instead, they allege that Dugan confronted the agents, instructing several to report to the chief judge’s office while she led Flores-Ruiz out through a private door, resulting in a chaotic foot chase.

Witness Testimonies

During the trial, agents testified about their preparations for the arrest and described how Dugan’s intervention forced them to scramble, leaving them unable to safely apprehend Flores-Ruiz. Judge Kristela Cervera also testified, expressing her discomfort during the incident and revealing that Dugan later admitted to trying to “help that guy.” These testimonies have painted a picture of a judge whose actions are now under scrutiny, raising questions about her motivations in the face of federal authority.

Background on Judge Dugan

Hannah Dugan, who has served on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court since 2016, has a background in both prosecution and defense, giving her a unique perspective on the judicial process. Her supporters argue that her actions on April 18 were intended to uphold the integrity of the courtroom and protect the rights of defendants. Critics, however, view her conduct as a blatant obstruction of justice and a challenge to federal immigration enforcement.

Context of Immigration Enforcement

This case occurs amid heightened federal immigration actions, particularly under policies from the Trump administration, which have intensified scrutiny of undocumented individuals even in sensitive locations like courthouses. The situation raises broader questions about the appropriateness of federal enforcement in judicial settings and the implications for due process. According to the ACLU, the increase in courthouse arrests has led to significant concerns regarding judicial intimidation.

Next Steps in the Trial

As the trial progresses, Dugan’s defense team is set to present their case, which includes calling four witnesses to testify. Closing arguments may begin as soon as Thursday afternoon. The outcome of this trial could have far-reaching implications for judicial conduct and immigration policy across the United States, highlighting the delicate balance between judicial independence and federal enforcement.