Milwaukee judge under scrutiny for allegedly aiding an undocumented individual to avoid apprehension pushes for the dismissal of the indictment against them.
Tossing Out Federal Charges:
Judge Hannah Dugan's legal squad is gunning for the dismissal of her federal indictment, claiming she's got judicial immunity for any official acts she supposedly took in helping an undocumented immigrant dodge the long arm of the law. The lawyers argue that this immunity is akin to the protection granted to congresspeople and executives for their official deeds.
The legal teams' argument stems from the common-law doctrine of judicial immunity, which shields judges from lawsuits over decisions they make in court. The centerpiece case they cite is Trump v. United States, dealing with presidential immunity – while it doesn't set direct precedent for judicial immunity in criminal cases, it's used to strengthen the argument that high-ranking government officials shouldn't face criminal charges for official acts.
However, the federal prosecutors aren't buying it, arguing that judicial immunity doesn't extend to dodging criminal liability for interfering with federal law enforcement business. They claim the Supreme Court has stated that judges aren't immune from criminal charges for actions that fall outside their recognized judicial duties.
The legal war centers on whether or not Dugan's actions fell within her official judicial duties or if they were personal interference with federal law enforcement. As of now, the government hasn't countersued her motion to dismiss the indictment.
Dugan was nabbed in the Milwaukee County Circuit Courthouse on April 25, accused of helping a defendant escape federal agents waiting to cuff him for immigration violations. Her attorneys argue that her acts were actions she took as a judge, and therefore, she deserves immunity from criminal prosecution.
FBI Director Kash Patel claimed on social media the judge deliberately steered federal agents away from the defendant they were trying to collar in her courthouse. But Dugan's lawyers contend that the door the defendant used to exit the courtroom led to the same public hallway a few feet away from her courtroom door. There, agents spotted him, trailed him to an elevator, and eventually apprehended him during a brief chase in the hallway.
Regardless of her motivations, they argue that her actions were protected under judicial immunity since judges have the right to maintain order in the courtroom. Additionally, her legal defense team is quite a powerhouse – led by Rick Resch, a former federal prosecutor, Dean Strang (known from the Netflix docuseries "Making a Murderer"), and Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general, who has argued before the Supreme Court over 100 times.
- The ongoing legal battle for Judge Hannah Dugan hinges on whether her actions in assisting an undocumented immigrant evade federal agents can be considered part of her official judicial duties, thereby granting her judicial immunity.
- In the courtroom, judges possess the right to maintain order, and as such, Dugan's legal team argues that her actions during a courtroom incident were protected under judicial immunity.
- The general news and political landscapes have been impacted by this case, as the interpretation of judicial immunity in criminal cases, particularly in the context of policy-and-legislation, has stirred debate among legal experts. Moreover, the high-profile legal team defending Judge Dugan has brought crime-and-justice issues to the forefront of public discourse.
