In a dramatic turn of events, Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan faces mounting pressure from Wisconsin’s top Republican leaders to step down following her felony conviction. The politicians have cited the state constitution as grounds for her immediate resignation.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Majority Leader Tyler August, both Republicans, issued a joint statement asserting that Dugan’s “privilege of serving the people of Wisconsin has come to an end.” They further warned of impeachment proceedings if she does not resign “immediately.”
Their demand is grounded in a constitutional provision that bars anyone convicted of a felony from holding an office of trust, profit, or honor in Wisconsin unless pardoned.
Judge Dugan was found guilty of obstructing an immigration arrest after a four-day trial that attracted national attention. The case highlighted the tensions between local courts and federal immigration enforcement.
The incident that led to her charges occurred on April 18. Federal immigration officers attempted to arrest a man appearing in Dugan’s courtroom on battery charges. Dugan allegedly redirected the officers and allowed the defendant to exit through a side door. He was later apprehended outside the courthouse.
Vos and August referred to a 1976 opinion by Democratic Attorney General Bronson La Follette about a state senator, to support their claim that Dugan’s conviction necessitates an immediate vacancy on the bench.
“Such is the case here, and Judge Dugan must recognize that the law requires her resignation,” they emphasized.
However, Howard Schweber, a legal expert from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, noted that while an appeal is likely, there is no immediate requirement for action. “One question is whether any action of this kind is appropriate prior to the point where those appeals are exhausted,” he stated.
After the jury’s decision, Dugan’s legal team declared at a press conference that “The case is a long way from over.” Her lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for further comments.
Schweber indicated that if the conviction is upheld, Dugan’s resignation would be appropriate. “It would seem to be appropriate as a normative and political matter to wait and see how the appeals come out,” he said.
Currently, Dugan remains suspended from her duties following her arrest. The Wisconsin Supreme Court confirmed that this suspension remains unchanged pending ongoing federal proceedings.
While awaiting potential appeals, Dugan’s sentencing date remains unannounced. Her conviction carries a possible sentence of up to five years in prison.
Political Valence Over a Legal Proceeding
The prosecution of Dugan stands as a significant example of the Trump administration’s stance towards those perceived as obstacles to its immigration policies.
Interim U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel downplayed the political implications, stating, “It is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day in a public courthouse.”
Nonetheless, Trump officials celebrated the verdict on social media. Deputy U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche remarked that the decision serves as a warning to “even those who wear robes.”
Schweber noted that the political landscape suggests a strategy by the Trump administration to target judges who oppose its immigration enforcement agenda. “But the fact that that political context exists does not invalidate the basic legal proposition,” he added.
Milwaukee activist groups have shown solidarity with Dugan following her conviction. The immigrant rights organization Voces de la Frontera released a statement highlighting similar incidents of arrests in local courthouses.
During the trial, prosecutors justified courthouse arrests by immigration agents, citing safety and security screenings as critical factors. Under former President Joe Biden’s administration, such actions were discouraged, arguing that it could hinder cooperation with law enforcement.
