Judge Hannah C. Dugan’s lawyers, a state judge in Wisconsin who has been accused or obstructed immigration agents, requested on Wednesday to dismiss federal charges against him.
A judicial presentation of his defense lawyers, which occurred one day after Judge Dugan was accused by a federal grand jury in Milwaukee, said that “the government cannot process Judge Dugan Becial Immune Acts.” “Since at least at the beginning of the 17th century in England, and continued through customary law in the United States, registered judges have had the right to absolute immunity for official acts with some exceptions that are not applied unprecedented and completely unconstitutional.”
Officials of the Department of Justice have defended their prosecution of Judge Dugan. They say that the judge directed an undocumented immigrant who appeared in the courtroom last month to an exit that was separated from a corridor where immigration officers waited to judge him. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond on Wednesday to a request for comments.
“It doesn’t matter in which line of work is, if you violate the law, we will follow the facts and process it,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi on the case.
The immigrant, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, was arrested outside the court after a pursuit. Mr. Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican immigrant, was illegally in the United States, federal authorities said. He had appeared in the court of Judge Dugan in the Milwaukee County Circuit Court in relation to a case of domestic abuse.
The FBI agents arrested Judge died several days later, and was accused on Tuesday for charges of hiding a person of judgment and obstruction of the procedures. It is scheduled to appear in a federal court in Milwaukee on Thursday. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin has temporarily eliminated the bank, while the federal case against it is in Progreso.
The case quickly became synonymous with the broader immigration repression of the Trump administration, and their warnings to local officials that they should not obstruct deportation efforts. The Trump administration has described the Prosecutor’s Office as a warning that no one is above the law, while many Democrats, Lawyers and former judges have denounced him as an assault on the Judiciary.
Judge Dugan’s motion to dismiss the case argued that “this is not an ordinary criminal case, and Dugan is not an ordinary criminal.”
Judge Dugan’s lawyers wrote that the prosecution of the government judge “violates the tenth amendment and the fundamental principles of federalism and the community reflected in that amendment and in the structure of the Constitution of the United States.”
Steven Wright, who teaches criminal law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Wisconsin, said the defense argues that Judge Dugan was acting as a judge.
“The fact that an individual uses the robe does not mean that he challenges the federal law,” he said. “But as the motion tries to make it clear, the Constitution gives the judges a great power to maintain order in their own court. So I hope that in the coming weeks, one of the things that the Government will have was to prove the motor justice.”
Earlier this month, more than 150 former state and federal judges signed a letter to Mrs. Bondi, qualifying the judgment of Judge Dugan, an attempt to intimidate the Judiciary.
“This cynical effort undermines the rule of law,” said that letter, “and destroys the confidence that the American people have in the judges of the Nation to administer justice in the courts and in the corridors of justice throughout the earth.”
Julie Bosman” Dan Simmons and Devlin Barrett Contributed reports.
