Milwaukee, Wis. — Judge Hannah Dugan is moving closer to facing trial over allegations that she aided a wanted undocumented immigrant escape from her courtroom. A federal judge has rejected a motion to dismiss the charges against her, marking a significant step in the ongoing legal proceedings.
The ruling came Tuesday from U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, who dismissed Dugan’s claim of immunity based on her position as a county judge. In his decision, Adelman emphasized that the nature of the allegations does not exempt her from prosecution. He referenced other cases involving judicial misconduct and bribery as precedents for holding judges accountable for their actions, even when they fall within the scope of their official duties.
Dugan’s defense team contended she acted within her judicial authority when she paused a hearing involving Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who faced charges related to assaulting his roommate. They allege that her actions were appropriate, as she directed Flores-Ruiz through a side exit of the courtroom.
Security footage from the courthouse captured Dugan directing two agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) away from her courtroom. However, a third ICE agent ultimately intercepted Flores-Ruiz before he could leave the courthouse.
The charges against Dugan garnered national attention when they were made public in April, and formal indictments followed in May. She is facing obstruction charges that could lead to a sentence of up to six years in prison if found guilty. Dugan has entered a not guilty plea in response to the allegations.
Initially scheduled for trial in July, proceedings were postponed while Judge Adelman considered the dismissal motion. A hearing has now been set for September, although further delays may occur if Dugan’s defense team chooses to appeal the recent ruling.
This is the second ruling from a federal judge affirming that Dugan should proceed to trial, following a magistrate judge’s similar decision earlier in July. The legal developments keep Dugan’s case at the forefront of discussions about judicial accountability in instances of alleged misconduct.
The case continues to unfold, raising questions about the boundaries of a judge’s role and the implications for others in the judiciary should the charges be upheld.
This article was automatically written by OpenAI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.