Milwaukee, WI – Former Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan received a $5,000 fine on Wednesday after a federal judge declined to impose prison time following her conviction for obstructing federal agents during an immigration arrest. The sentencing, handed down by U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, a Democratic appointee, concludes a significant chapter in a case that has ignited national discussions regarding judicial authority, the scope of immigration enforcement, and the boundaries of a judge’s power when confronted with federal operations.
"I am a public servant who’s just trying to do my job." — Hannah Dugan, Former Milwaukee County Judge
Judge Adelman opted against incarceration or probation for Dugan, acknowledging her decades of public service and absence of a prior criminal record, while still characterizing her actions as a serious error in judgment. Dugan had faced a federal jury in December, which convicted her of felony obstruction but acquitted her of a separate charge related to concealing an individual from arrest.
The charges against Dugan stemmed from an incident on April 18, 2025, at the Milwaukee County Courthouse. On that day, federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrived at the courthouse to apprehend Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican national who had illegally reentered the United States. Flores-Ruiz was scheduled to appear before Judge Dugan for a state battery case. Prosecutors alleged that Dugan interfered with the federal operation by confronting the agents outside her courtroom, questioning their authority, and instructing them to report to the chief judge’s office. According to the prosecution, after the agents left to comply, Dugan allegedly allowed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to exit the courtroom through a private jury door and a restricted hallway. Federal agents later located Flores-Ruiz outside the courthouse and successfully took him into custody.
Federal prosecutors contended that Dugan's actions constituted an abuse of judicial authority, emphasizing that judges, like all citizens, are bound by the law, even when they disagree with governmental policies or enforcement decisions. They argued that the case was fundamentally about accountability and preserving public confidence in the integrity of the judicial system.
Addressing the court before her sentencing, Dugan defended her conduct, asserting that her primary motivation was to maintain safety and order within her courtroom during an unusual and unexpected situation. She stated that her actions were not driven by personal interest or malicious intent, and she believed the events had been portrayed in a manner that did not accurately reflect her true intentions. "I am a public servant who’s just trying to do my job," Dugan told the court, according to Spectrum News 1. She added that while she had been depicted as both a hero and a lawbreaker, she felt neither description accurately captured her actions.
Dugan’s defense team highlighted the substantial consequences she had already endured, including her resignation from the judgeship she had held for nine years and her subsequent withdrawal from public life due to threats directed at her and her family. Supporters described her as a dedicated public servant who had committed much of her career to community service.
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Adelman stated that the imposed sentence needed to reflect both the gravity of the offense and the specific circumstances surrounding the defendant. He noted that the obstruction occurred over a relatively brief period and concluded that prison time or probation was not warranted given the significant repercussions Dugan had already experienced.
Despite the sentencing, the legal proceedings are not fully concluded. Dugan’s attorneys have indicated their intent to appeal the conviction to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They argue that the prosecution of their client raises serious questions about judicial independence and the delicate balance of power between state courts and federal immigration enforcement agencies. Dugan had resigned from the Milwaukee County Circuit Court in January following her conviction and calls for her removal from office.
This case continues to fuel a broader national dialogue concerning immigration enforcement strategies, the extent of judicial discretion, and the legal parameters governing government officials' potential interference with federal operations while performing their duties. The outcome of the appeal will likely further contribute to this ongoing debate.
