Judge Hannah Dugan Convicted of Obstruction in Immigration Case, Faces Five Years Behind Bars

A Wisconsin judge who once stood at the front of a courtroom is now facing a criminal conviction that could send her to prison.

Verdict and Sentencing

On Thursday, a jury in Milwaukee found Judge Hannah Dugan guilty of obstruction of federal authorities, a felony that carries up to five years in prison. The jury acquitted her on the misdemeanor count of concealing an individual to prevent arrest. The jury deliberated for six hours before delivering the verdict. No sentencing date has been set as of late Thursday evening.

Political Reactions

The case has become a flashpoint for the ongoing debate over President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown. Trump’s administration has branded Dugan an “activist judge,” while Democrats argue that the administration is using the case to blunt judicial opposition to the operation.

U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel, who prosecuted the case, denied it was political. He urged the public to accept the verdict peacefully. “Some have sought to make this about a larger political battle,” Schimel said. “While this case is serious for all involved, it is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day, in a public courthouse. The defendant is certainly not evil. Nor is she a martyr for some greater cause.”

U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche praised the verdict on X, stating that nobody is above the law, even judges.

The Arrest and Trial

Dugan was arrested by FBI agents in the Milwaukee County Courthouse parking lot on April 25. After the verdict, she and her attorneys left the courtroom, ducked into a side conference room, and closed the door without speaking to reporters. Steve Biskupic, her lead attorney, told reporters he was disappointed and did not understand how the jury could have reached a split verdict when the elements of both charges were virtually the same.

According to court filings that include an FBI affidavit and a federal grand jury indictment, immigration authorities traveled to the Milwaukee County courthouse on April 18. They learned that 31‑year‑old Eduardo Flores‑Ruiz had reentered the United States illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.

Dugan learned that agents were in the corridor outside her courtroom waiting for Flores‑Ruiz. She left the courtroom to confront them, falsely telling them their administrative warrant for Flores‑Ruiz wasn’t sufficient grounds to arrest him and directing them to go to the chief judge’s office.

While the agents were gone, Dugan addressed Flores‑Ruiz’s case off the record. She told his attorney that he could attend his next hearing via Zoom and led Flores‑Ruiz and the attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores‑Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside, and arrested him after a foot chase. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced in November that he had been deported.

Prosecutors worked during the trial to show that Dugan directed agents to the chief judge’s office to create an opening for Flores‑Ruiz to escape. An FBI agent who led the investigation testified that after agents left the corridor, she immediately moved Flores‑Ruiz’s case to the top of her docket, told him he could appear for his next hearing via Zoom, and led him out the private door.

Prosecutors also played audio recordings from her courtroom in which she can be heard telling her court reporter that she’d take “the heat” for leading Flores‑Ruiz out the back.

Her attorneys countered that she was trying to follow courthouse protocols that called for court employees to report any immigration agents to their supervisors and that she didn’t intentionally try to obstruct the arrest team.

Key Takeaways

• Judge Hannah Dugan was convicted of obstruction and faces up to five years in prison, while acquitted of the misdemeanor concealment charge.
• The case highlights tensions over Trump’s immigration crackdown and has drawn political commentary from both sides.
• Dugan’s actions on April 18, including directing agents away and helping Flores‑Ruiz exit the courthouse, were central to the prosecution’s case.

The verdict underscores that even judges are subject to the law. The outcome will likely influence how federal authorities approach interactions with the judiciary in future immigration enforcement actions.