A federal jury is currently hearing the case against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah L. Dugan, who stands accused of obstructing Department of Homeland Security officials and knowingly helping undocumented Mexican national Eduardo Flores-Ruiz evade arrest inside her own courthouse. The trial pits the concept of judicial independence against federal immigration law, raising stark questions about local “sanctuary-style” policies and the rule of law. Prosecutors argue her actions endangered officers by forcing a street chase, while the defense claims she was merely following a draft courthouse policy intended to restrict immigration arrests in nonpublic areas.
Story Snapshot
- A Milwaukee judge is on trial for allegedly steering a criminal illegal immigrant away from ICE and out a private jury door.
- Federal prosecutors say her actions endangered officers and the public by forcing a street chase instead of a controlled courthouse arrest.
- The defense claims she was merely following a draft local policy that restricted immigration arrests in nonpublic courthouse areas.
- The case tests how far activist courthouse policies can go in undermining federal immigration enforcement.
Judge Accused of Helping Illegal Migrant Evade Courthouse Arrest
Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah L. Dugan is being tried in federal court on two serious counts: obstruction of Department of Homeland Security officials and knowingly concealing undocumented Mexican national Eduardo Flores‑Ruiz to help him evade arrest inside the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Prosecutors say that after learning federal immigration officers were waiting to pick up Flores‑Ruiz, she diverted them to the chief judge’s office and then personally led the defendant and his lawyer out a private jury door, away from agents stationed in public areas.
Federal agents eventually spotted Flores‑Ruiz leaving the building and had to chase him through traffic outside the courthouse before taking him into custody. DHS later described Flores‑Ruiz as a criminal illegal alien with a “laundry list” of violent charges, including strangulation and suffocation, battery, and domestic abuse, and he was ultimately deported. Dugan has pleaded not guilty and faces up to six years in prison if convicted, an extraordinary situation for a sitting state judge whose own conduct is now under federal scrutiny.
🚨 BREAKING: A sitting judge is now in federal court—accused of helping an illegal alien evade ICE from the bench itself. Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan faces felony charges, no immunity, and up to 6 years in prison. Trump says clean up the courts. This is law vs lawlessness pic.twitter.com/iUIdQ68Ctx
— Next News Network 🇺🇲 (@nextnews) December 16, 2025
How a Draft Courthouse Policy Collided with Federal Immigration Law
The confrontation traces back to a draft Milwaukee County policy on immigration arrests in the courthouse circulated about a week before the incident by Chief Judge Carl Ashley. That draft barred agents from executing administrative immigration warrants in nonpublic courthouse areas and instructed staff to send federal officers to a supervisor. Dugan’s defense team leans heavily on that document, arguing she was simply enforcing courthouse rules by directing DHS and CBP officers to the chief judge’s office and avoiding immigration enforcement activities in private, nonpublic spaces under her control.
For conservatives, this policy highlights a familiar pattern: local officials using technical rules and “sanctuary‑style” restrictions to frustrate federal immigration law. In this case, the alleged result was not a paperwork delay, but a dangerous foot chase through city streets involving a previously deported illegal immigrant with a record of violent behavior. Federal prosecutors argue that Dugan went far beyond managing her courtroom, using that draft policy as cover while actively clearing an escape route for Flores‑Ruiz and momentarily pulling officers away from their position, undermining both officer safety and the integrity of federal law inside a taxpayer‑funded courthouse.
Competing Narratives: Judicial Independence or Activist Obstruction?
Inside the federal courtroom, jurors are hearing sharply different stories about what happened in that Milwaukee hallway. DHS, CBP, and FBI witnesses describe a judge who approached them, jerked her thumb and told them to “get out,” sending some officers off to meet the chief judge while she moved Flores‑Ruiz through a private door. One fellow Milwaukee judge testified she was “shocked” by Dugan’s conduct, signaling that even within the local judiciary, many saw these actions as far outside normal courtroom management or any reasonable understanding of judicial independence.
Defense attorney Steven Biskupic counters that Dugan lacked any intent to obstruct and simply followed the chief judge’s draft directive: refer immigration agents upward and avoid arrests in nonpublic spaces. He notes that agents retained full authority to arrest Flores‑Ruiz in public hallways at any point and chose not to act until after he had exited the building, arguing that this breaks the chain of criminal responsibility. Prosecutors point to courtroom audio where Dugan can be heard telling staff, “I’ll get the heat,” suggesting she understood her actions were controversial and possibly improper, which jurors may weigh heavily when deciding whether this was neutral policy enforcement or conscious interference.
Why This Case Matters for Immigration Enforcement and the Rule of Law
The outcome of this trial reaches far beyond one judge and one illegal immigrant. During Trump’s earlier term, aggressive immigration enforcement in and around courthouses drew fierce resistance from left‑leaning state judiciaries and bar groups, many of which claimed ICE presence would scare witnesses and victims. In practice, those local edicts often created de facto safe zones for illegal immigrants with criminal records, pushing them beyond the reach of federal law even as ordinary citizens were still expected to follow every rule handed down from the bench.
Now, under a renewed national focus on border security and law‑and‑order, this federal prosecution sends a stark signal: judges do not stand above the law when they interfere with federal officers doing their jobs. If jurors convict, it will affirm that activist judges who use courthouse access, side doors, or procedural games to shield criminal illegal aliens can be held personally accountable. If they acquit, it may embolden local courts elsewhere to push courthouse “sanctuary” policies even further, forcing future conservative administrations to confront not only open borders activists, but also an entrenched judicial culture willing to bend rules to protect those who broke America’s immigration laws and allegedly harmed their own communities.
Watch the report: Judge Accused Of Helping Illegal Immigrant Escape ICE
Sources:
- Trial opens of US judge accused of helping migrant evade arrest
- Trial begins for Wisconsin judge accused of helping immigrant evade federal authorities
- Fellow Wisconsin judge ‘shocked’ by Hannah Dugan’s response to immigration officers
- Officers say at trial of Milwaukee judge her actions made their job more dangerous
