by eterps on 4/25/25, 3:25 PM with 940 comments
by Animats on 4/25/25, 6:46 PM
The big distinction is that an administrative warrant does not authorize a search.
[1] https://www.aclunc.org/our-work/know-your-rights/know-your-r...
[2] https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-Subpoen...
by kemayo on 4/25/25, 3:43 PM
It sounds like the arrest isn't because of any official act of the judge, but rather over them either not telling the ICE agents where the person was or giving them the wrong information about their location.
There are some pretty broad laws about "you can't lie to the feds", but I think the unusual thing here is that they're using them against a reasonably politically-connected person who's not their main target. (They're normally akin to the "we got Al Capone for tax evasion" situation -- someone they were going after, where they couldn't prove the main crime, but they could prove that they lied about other details.)
EDIT: since I wrote that 15 minutes ago, the article has been updated with more details about what the judge did:
> ICE agents arrived in the judge’s courtroom last Friday during a pre-trial hearing for Eduardo Flores Ruiz, a 30-year-old Mexican national who is facing misdemeanor battery charges in Wisconsin.
> Dugan asked the agents to leave and speak to the circuit court’s chief judge, the Journal Sentinel reported. By the time they returned, Flores Ruiz had left.
I.e. the ICE agents showed up in the middle of a court proceeding, and the judge said they'd need to get permission from the chief judge before they could interrupt proceedings. The judge then didn't stop the defendant from leaving once the proceeding was done.
EDIT 2: the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article says:
> Sources say Dugan didn't hide the defendant and his attorney in a jury deliberation room, as other media have said. Rather, sources said, when ICE officials left to talk with the chief judge on the same floor, Dugan took the pair to a side door in the courtroom, directed them down a private hallway and into the public area on the 6th floor.
Which is an escalation above the former "didn't stop them", admittedly, but I'm not sure how it gets to "misdirection".
by jawiggins on 4/25/25, 4:39 PM
" 29. Multiple witnesses have described their observations after Judge DUGAN returned to her courtroom after directing members of the arrest team to the Chief Judge’s office. For example, the courtroom deputy recalled that upon the courtroom deputy’s return to the courtroom,defense counsel for Flores-Ruiz was talking to the clerk, and Flores-Ruiz was seated in the jury box, rather than in the gallery. The courtroom deputy believed that counsel and the clerk were having an off-the-record conversation to pick the next court date. Defense counsel and Flores-Ruizthen walked toward each other and toward the public courtroom exit. The courtroom deputy then saw Judge DUGAN get up and heard Judge DUGAN say something like “Wait, come with me.” Despite having been advised of the administrative warrant for the arrest of Flores-Ruiz, Judge DUGAN then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his counsel out of the courtroom through the “jury door,” which leads to a nonpublic area of the courthouse. These events were also unusual for two reasons.First, the courtroom deputy had previously heard Judge DUGAN direct people not to sit in the jury box because it was exclusively for the jury’s use. Second, according to the courtroom deputy, only deputies, juries, court staff, and in-custody defendants being escorted by deputies used the back jury door. Defense attorneys and defendants who were not in custody never used the jury door."
[1]: https://apnews.com/article/immigration-judge-arrested-799718...
by cactacea on 4/25/25, 5:28 PM
by EnPissant on 4/25/25, 5:26 PM
1. ICE obtained and brought an administrative immigration warrant to arrest Flores-Ruiz after his 8:30 a.m. state-court hearing in Courtroom 615 (Judge Dugan’s court).
2. Agents informed the courtroom deputy of their plan and waited in the public hallway. A public-defender attorney photographed them and alerted Judge Dugan.
3. Judge Dugan left the bench, confronted the agents in the hallway, angrily insisted they needed a judicial warrant, and ordered them to see the Chief Judge. Judge A (another judge) escorted most of the team away. One DEA agent remained unnoticed.
4. Returning to her courtroom, Judge Dugan placed Flores-Ruiz in the jury box, then personally escorted him and his attorney through the locked jury-door into non-public corridors: an exit normally used only for in-custody defendants escorted by deputies.
5. The prosecutor (ADA) handling the case was present, as were the victims of the domestic violence charges. However, the case was never called on the record, and the ADA was never informed of the adjournment.
6. Flores-Ruiz and counsel used a distant elevator, exited on 9th Street, and walked toward the front plaza. Agents who had just left the Chief Judge’s office spotted them. When approached, Flores-Ruiz sprinted away.
7. After a brief foot chase along State Street, agents arrested Flores-Ruiz at 9:05 a.m., about 22 minutes after first seeing him inside.
[1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69943125/united-states-...
by djoldman on 4/25/25, 4:16 PM
> “First and foremost, I know -- as a former federal prosecutor and as a defense lawyer for decades – that a person who is a judge, who has a residence who has no problem being found, should not be arrested, if you will, like some common criminal,” Gimbel said. “And I'm shocked and surprised that the US Attorney's office or the FBI would not have invited her to show up and accept process if they're going to charge her with a crime.”
> He said that typically someone who is “not on the run,” and facing this type of crime would be called and invited to come in to have their fingerprints taken or to schedule a court appearance.
by bix6 on 4/25/25, 4:22 PM
by kstrauser on 4/25/25, 5:09 PM
Even if I put all human rights issues aside, I don't want anyone to be punished for talking to the police simply because of their immigration status, because their freedom to do so makes my own daily life safer.
Well, that goes double for courtrooms. If some guy's due to testify in a murder case, I don't want him skipping court because some quota-making jackass at ICE wants to arrest him because of a visa issue.
In this case, the person was actually in court to face misdemeanor charges (of which they haven't been convicted yet, i.e. they're still legally innocent). I want people to go to court to face trial instead of skipping out because they fear they'll be arrested and deported for unrelated reasons. I bet the judge has pretty strong opinions on that exact issue, too.
by eterps on 4/25/25, 3:39 PM
https://bsky.app/profile/sethabramson.bsky.social/post/3lnnj...
by acdha on 4/25/25, 3:38 PM
by openasocket on 4/25/25, 3:59 PM
by bluGill on 4/25/25, 3:45 PM
I don't know how courts will see it, but it is an interesting legal question that I hope some lawyers run with.
by cmurf on 4/25/25, 8:46 PM
https://abovethelaw.com/2025/04/conservative-judge-doesnt-pu...
---
This — the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s arrest today of a sitting judge — against the backdrop that the President of the United States is, at this same moment, defying an April 10 Order of the Supreme Court of the United States ... - April 25, 2025
(thread continues)
https://bsky.app/profile/judgeluttig.bsky.social/post/3lnnzb...
---
To read the Criminal Complaint and attached FBI Affidavit that gave rise to Wisconsin State Judge Hannah Dugan’s federal criminal arrest today for obstructing or impeding a proceeding before a department or agency of the United States and concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest is at once to know to a certainty that neither the state courts nor the federal courts could ever even hope to administer justice if the spectacle that took place in Judge Dugan’s courthouse last Friday April 18 took place in the courthouses across the country. - April 25, 2025
(thread continues)
https://bsky.app/profile/judgeluttig.bsky.social/post/3lnnxq...
by chews on 4/25/25, 3:46 PM
It's a sad day in America when people do actually enforce the rules get trapped by other rules.
by xpe on 4/25/25, 4:49 PM
In particular, part D: "Judge DUGAN escorts Flores-Ruiz through a “jury door” to avoid his arrest."
by yesco on 4/25/25, 3:33 PM
by exiguus on 4/25/25, 5:57 PM
by underseacables on 4/25/25, 3:38 PM
If Patel does not come back with some thing on that level or better, then this was a horrible farce.
by hn_acker on 4/30/25, 2:28 PM
[1] The Judge Dugan Case Is More Complicated Than It Seems - https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-judge-dugan-case-is...
by esbranson on 4/25/25, 4:23 PM
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69943125/united-states-...
by empath75 on 4/25/25, 4:35 PM
by phendrenad2 on 4/28/25, 3:06 PM
by TrapLord_Rhodo on 4/27/25, 12:58 AM
>[Afterwards] Dugan took the pair to a side door in the courtroom, directed them down a private hallway and into the public area on the 6th floor.
Seems like “intentionally misdirecting” federal agents to me.
by kcatskcolbdi on 4/25/25, 4:45 PM
I have no deep admiration for judges, but the motivation for this seems deeply ideological, and I don't see a bright future where judges are arrested by the Gestapo based on ideological differences.
by nonethewiser on 4/25/25, 5:03 PM
What is left here thats worth protecting? Not someone we want in the country and the agents had a warrant for his arrest (court comes after that). I feel like this is a serious own-goal by the people opposing this. Read the complaint corroborated by witnesses - she clearly did help him evade arrest: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.11...
by firesteelrain on 4/26/25, 12:51 AM
by _DeadFred_ on 4/25/25, 10:49 PM
by neilpointer on 4/25/25, 7:09 PM
by Sammi on 4/26/25, 9:35 AM
by nis0s on 4/25/25, 4:35 PM
The Republicans are right that the lawlessness around the border needs to be controlled, but this is not the way to do it. If I recall correctly, Biden deported millions of illegal immigrants during his term. Whatever is going on right now isn’t security, but a farce.
by like_any_other on 4/25/25, 3:42 PM
Federal agents have been using this to charge people for nearly a century [1]. Personally I find the law itself repellent, and more often than not it is used to manufacture crimes out of thin air. But if the article is accurate, then nothing has changed - the law is simply being applied evenly, and judges are not above the law.
by jwsteigerwalt on 4/25/25, 4:03 PM
by tptacek on 4/25/25, 4:11 PM
by robblbobbl on 4/25/25, 6:19 PM
by mmooss on 4/25/25, 6:34 PM
The Trump administration have been talking for weeks, maybe months, of finding ways for US attorneys to prosecute local officials who do not support Trump's immigration policy. Note that they also are threatening punishment through budget and policy.
Also, realize that immigration is just the first step:
* It's the first step in legitimizing mass prejudice - including stereotypes, in this case of non-wealthy immigrants - and hatred, and legitimizing that as a basis for denying people their humanity, dignity, and rights.
* It's a first step to legitimizing government terror as a policy tool.
* It's a first step in expanding the executive branch's power - I suspect chosen because the executive branch already has a lot of power in that domain. Note their claim to deny any check on their power by Congress (through the laws, which are made by Congress, and funding, which is appropriated by Congress) and the courts.
* It's a first step to expanding federal power vis-a-vis the states.
The next steps will be to use those now-legitimate tools on other groups, other forms of power, etc.
Part of the way it works is corruption: people make an exception or support it because it's following the herd, because opposing it is harder and sometimes scary, because they don't like this particular group and it seems legitimate in some way ....
Then when they turn these weapons on you, what standing do you have to disagree? I think in particular of politically vulnerable communities who are going along with these things or saying, 'not our problem' - you're next. That's where "First they came for the socialists ..." etc. comes from. (And you'll note that, not coincidentally, they are also coming for some socialists now and laying the groundwork for more, but most people don't like the socialists anyway so that's fine!)
by tlogan on 4/25/25, 4:37 PM
I’m getting concerned that our judicial branch is becoming more and more political. And believe me there are many right wing judges.
by bonif on 4/25/25, 4:06 PM
by whoknowsidont on 4/25/25, 3:41 PM
Activate their respective national guards and make it happen.
Yes, that means defying federal law. Yes that means exactly the consequences you want to draw from those actions.
There is no other option at this point. The law is dead in the U.S.
by hidingfearful on 4/25/25, 3:57 PM
by bko on 4/25/25, 3:33 PM
by jaco6 on 4/25/25, 4:06 PM
by Supermancho on 4/25/25, 3:44 PM
Judge (or the courthouse in some regard) assured immigrants-of-interest^ would not be detained in courthouse, to speed up legal proceedings and to try to ensure equitable justice was being served.
An immigrant was identified by ICE and the judge directed ICE somewhere and when the immigrant was not apprehended (maybe appeared in court for his 3 BATTERY misdemeanors), the FBI was called in to arrest the judge at the courthouse for obstruction. Immigrant of interest was apprehended.
That sound about right? Bueller? Bueller?
^ The immigrants of interest are of varied legal status, so I'll just say "of interest".
by crote on 4/25/25, 4:31 PM
Let's say I murder someone. I definitely did it, and there's plenty of evidence. What's stopping my hypothetical ICE buddy from showing up at my first court appearance, arresting me, and deporting me to a country without extradition by claiming that I am an "illegal immigrant"?
by daheza on 4/25/25, 3:46 PM
I don't expect Congress to start getting arrested until or if they ever do any significant pushback against Trump and his cronies.
This is America now, the land of the lawless and unjust. Prepare accordingly people, if they do not like what you are doing they will use their full power to stop you.
by josefritzishere on 4/25/25, 4:52 PM
by throwaway5752 on 4/25/25, 3:51 PM
If you are tempted to downvote, you could make a better point by finding comparable examples under any other modern president.
by anonym29 on 4/25/25, 4:03 PM
We're clearly living in two different realities already, brought about the partisan media (on both sides) willfully and deliberately misrepresenting reality to serve the interests of their shadowy trillion-dollar corporate conglomerates, amplified by the digital echo chambers brought about other secretive, manipulative trillion-dollar corporate conglomerates.
Is it seriously better to let the entire federal government collapse, leaving a power void in it's wake, than to have two Americas with freedom of movement, free trade, etc?
by esbranson on 4/25/25, 4:14 PM
"Our legal system provides methods for challenging the Government's right to ask questions—lying is not one of them." — Justice Harlan
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements [2] https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...
by huitzitziltzin on 4/25/25, 3:47 PM
by guywithahat on 4/25/25, 10:04 PM
This isn't controversial.
by Gabriel54 on 4/25/25, 5:41 PM
by mempko on 4/25/25, 6:11 PM
by ConspiracyFact on 4/25/25, 8:12 PM
by DrillShopper on 4/25/25, 4:18 PM
by chmorgan_ on 4/25/25, 7:08 PM