Magistrate deals blow to Hannah Dugan’s effort to get charges tossed
Federal agents arrive outside Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan’s courtroom
Federal agents arrive outside Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan’s courtroom
- Judge Dugan is accused of helping an undocumented immigrant evade federal agents.
- The magistrate judge’s recommendation will be reviewed by the trial judge for a final decision.
- Judge Dugan has pleaded not guilty and a scheduling hearing is set for July 9.
A federal magistrate judge has delivered a setback to Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan and her legal team’s effort to get the obstruction charge against her dismissed.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph issued a report and recommendation late July 7, recommending against Dugan’s bid to have the case tossed on grounds the judge is protected by judicial immunity.
Joseph’s 37-page report and recommendation also states that the prosecution and Dugan’s team should resolve any differences regarding the facts of the cases at trial.
“Dugan disputes the government’s version of events, and the government will have the burden of proving its allegations beyond a reasonable doubt at trial,” Joseph wrote. “However, these contested facts cannot be resolved at this juncture.”
Joseph’s report will now go to U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, the trial judge who will make the final decision on the motion to dismiss.
“We are disappointed in the magistrate judge’s non-binding recommendation, and we will appeal it,” Dugan attorney Steven Biskupic, a former U.S. attorney, said in a statement. “This is only one step in what we expect will be a long journey to preserve the independence and integrity of our courts.”
Dugan’s lawyers filed a memorandum on May 29 arguing her federal prosecution is improper, violating the 10th Amendment and amounting to federal overreach.
Prosecutors countered that the judicial immunity argument is flawed and unsupported by legal precedent, adding that Dugan is “not above the law.”
Dugan was indicted May 13 on charges she obstructed a federal agency and helped undocumented immigrant Eduardo Flores-Ruiz elude federal agents in the Milwaukee County Courthouse to arrest him.
Flores-Ruiz, 31, was arrested April 18 following a short chase outside the courthouse.
Dugan herself was arrested by the FBI at the courthouse a week later, placing her at the center of the ongoing dispute between the Trump administration and the judiciary.
Dugan, 66, has pleaded not guilty to the charges, one a felony and the other a misdemeanor. If convicted, she could face a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $350,000 fine, but sentences in cases involving nonviolent offenses typically are much shorter.
A scheduling hearing is set for July 9. No trial date has been set.
Joseph’s report examines numerous cases, including one in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump had immunity from prosecution.
Joseph said that ruling does not apply here, contrary to the arguments by Dugan’s lawyers.
“While Dugan asserts that Trump simply extended to the President the same immunity from prosecution that judges already have, this argument makes a leap too far. Trump says nothing about criminal immunity for judicial acts,” Joseph wrote.
Joseph said she agrees with Dugan’s attorneys that judges have great power but that does not give her absolute immunity.
“I do not agree that the case law supports that these judicial acts bar prosecution where the indictment alleges that the acts were done ‘corruptly’ or to facilitate violation of the criminal law,” she wrote.
The report says judges have immunity from civil lawsuits seeking monetary damages when engaging in judicial acts. But Joseph said such immunity does not apply in criminal cases.
“A judge’s actions, even when done in her official capacity, do not bar criminal prosecution if the actions were done in violation of the criminal law.”
Joseph adds that her ruling does not address the merits of the charges against Dugan.
In addition, she noted that the two sides do not agree on the facts of the case.
“It is important to note that nothing said here speaks to the merits of the allegations against Dugan,” Joseph said in the recommendation. “Dugan is presumed innocent, and innocent she remains, unless and until the government proves the allegations against her beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury at trial.”
(This story was updated to add new information.)
Share this content:
Post Comment