On Friday, December 19, 2025, the Times Union reported that Wisconsin Republicans are calling for Judge Hannah Dugan’s immediate resignation following her felony conviction for obstruction. If she refuses to step down, they are threatening to initiate impeachment proceedings.
The charges stem from an incident in April in which Judge Dugan was accused of interfering with federal officers attempting to apprehend a Mexican immigrant outside her courtroom.
According to federal prosecutors, Dugan distracted the officers and guided the immigrant, later identified as Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, out of the courthouse through a private exit. A jury found her guilty of felony obstruction after a four-day trial. The conviction carries a potential sentence of up to five years in prison, although the presiding federal judge has the discretion to impose a lesser sentence.
Wisconsin’s Constitution stipulates that convicted felons are prohibited from holding public office. However, the exact timeline for Dugan’s removal from office remains unclear. The state Judicial Commission, responsible for disciplining state judges, and Milwaukee County Chief Judge Carl Ashley, Dugan’s supervisor, have not yet commented on when her position will officially be declared vacant. State law dictates that a vacancy only occurs upon the sentencing of the convicted officeholder.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Majority Leader Tyler August, both Republicans, issued a joint statement, asserting that Dugan’s conviction disqualifies her from continuing to serve the people of Wisconsin. They cited a 1976 legal opinion from then-Attorney General Bronson La Follette, which stated that a state senator forfeited his seat upon being convicted of a felony.
The statement from Vos and August emphasized the importance of impartiality and integrity within the judiciary. They asserted that Judge Dugan’s actions demonstrated a lack of both, effectively ending her privilege of serving the state.
The case has unfolded against a backdrop of heightened political tensions surrounding President Donald Trump’s strict immigration policies. Some Democrats have argued that the prosecution of Dugan was politically motivated, intended to suppress judicial opposition to the administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. The Trump administration previously labeled Dugan an activist judge and publicized images of her being taken into custody.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi posted a statement on social media, asserting that “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW” and that the Department of Justice would not waver in its commitment to ensuring the safety of America.
Dugan did not testify during the trial. Her lead attorney, Steve Biskupic, expressed surprise at the jury’s split verdict, arguing that the elements of the charges were substantially similar. Her legal team is expected to appeal the verdict.
A coalition of 13 advocacy groups, including Common Cause Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters Wisconsin, has called for higher courts to carefully examine the constitutional implications of the case, particularly concerning due process, judicial authority, and potential federal overreach.
The Democracy Defenders Fund, an organization focused on defending democratic principles, launched a fundraising campaign to assist with Dugan’s legal expenses. The group’s executive chair, Norm Eisen, stated that the case is far from over and that higher courts will have the opportunity to review the prosecution’s actions.
John Vaudreuil, a former U.S. attorney in Madison, anticipates a challenging appeal for Dugan, noting that appellate courts typically interpret evidence in a manner most favorable to the government. He suggested that the jury’s split verdict indicated that they believed Dugan intentionally obstructed the officers but did not believe she concealed the immigrant in a broader sense.
Vaudreuil expects U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman to schedule a sentencing date soon, although the actual sentencing may be delayed pending the completion of a pre-sentencing report.
The incident that led to Dugan’s conviction occurred on April 18, when immigration officers arrived at the Milwaukee County courthouse to apprehend Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who had illegally reentered the country and was scheduled to appear before Dugan on a state battery charge. Dugan initially directed the agents to Chief Judge Ashley’s office.
After the agents left, she escorted Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out of the courthouse through a private jury exit. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz, pursued him, and arrested him after a brief chase. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced in November that Flores-Ruiz had been deported.
Source: Times Union
