On Friday, May 2, 2025, United Press International reported that the arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan has prompted varied perspectives from legal experts regarding its implications for judicial integrity and jurisdictional boundaries.
Dugan was arrested on April 25, 2025, at the Milwaukee County Courthouse, facing federal charges of obstructing a proceeding and concealing an individual to evade arrest. The incident, which occurred on April 18, 2025, involved Dugan allegedly assisting a person subject to a removal order in avoiding federal deportation officers.
Jon Gould, a professor of criminology, law, and society at the University of California-Irvine, described the arrest as raising intricate issues about the rule of law, immigration policies, and federal versus state authority. He noted that the case could be viewed in two ways: as an assault on the judiciary’s independence by federal intervention or as a judge allowing personal biases to interfere with legal obligations, thereby enabling a suspect to leave her courtroom. Gould emphasized that while Dugan’s actions may warrant consequences, the key questions are who should administer the penalty and in what manner.
Meena Bose, dean of Hofstra University’s public policy program and director of presidential studies, highlighted that arresting a judge at a courthouse is highly unusual. She suggested that a referral to a judicial conference in Wisconsin could have been a more appropriate initial step to address the allegations. The article referenced a similar case involving Massachusetts District Court Judge Shelley Joseph, who faced charges in 2019 after an investigation into a 2018 incident, noting that Joseph’s case did not involve an immediate arrest.
Bose acknowledged the need for accountability in Dugan’s case but expressed concern that the Justice Department’s aggressive approach might foster a climate of fear among judges, potentially causing uncertainty about the scope of their authority. She described the arrest as excessive, though she considered Dugan’s suspension by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to be reasonable.
Russell Wheeler, a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, raised concerns about the broader impact of federal deportation agents operating within courthouses. He argued that such actions could deter individuals, particularly those without legal status, from participating in judicial processes, such as testifying or cooperating with law enforcement. Wheeler stressed that courthouses should remain accessible to all, regardless of immigration status, to preserve the integrity of the judicial system. He drew a parallel to the concept of churches as no-arrest zones to protect religious freedom, asserting that courthouses should similarly be safeguarded to ensure people feel safe reporting crimes or providing evidence.
The experts’ comments reflect a consensus that Dugan’s actions require scrutiny, but the manner and context of her arrest spark debate about judicial autonomy, federal overreach, and the broader implications for public trust in the court system. The case continues to unfold as Dugan remains suspended pending further legal proceedings.
Source: United Press International
