Posted on 05/31/2025 5:08:27 AM PDT by Libloather
A bipartisan group of more than 130 retired judges filed a brief Friday urging a federal court to drop charges against Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan, saying her arrest undermines "centuries of precedent on judicial immunity."
Dugan, a Milwaukee County circuit court judge, was arrested April 25 by FBI agents on federal allegations she prevented the arrest of a man by immigration authorities during a federal law enforcement operation at her courthouse. The man, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, was arrested and detained at an immigration detention center.
In an amicus brief filed Friday, the group of judges argue that Dugan shouldn't be prosecuted because "she is entitled to absolute immunity for her official acts."
"This bar on prosecution is the same absolute immunity that is given to members of the legislative and executive branches for their actions taken in an official capacity," the brief read.
The group of 138 former state and federal judges called the prosecution of Dugan, who was indicted by a grand jury earlier this month on one count each of concealing an individual to prevent arrest and obstruction, an "egregious overreach by the executive branch" that "threatens public trust in the judicial system and the ability of the public to avail themselves of courthouses without fear of reprisal."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I didn’t realize, helping an illegal alien escape from ICE, is one of her official duties.
A bipartisan group of more than 130 retired judges and and 51 secret service and FIB agents too.
they think what she did was an official act?
thank goodness they are retired
What BS - helping the illegal wasn't an official act - it was as personal as they come.
How is breaking the law an official act?
Then the combined expertise of 130 judges should be able to produce the LAW that states this - RIGHT?
Yes! Us inquiring minds want to know!
Copilot says:
“she is entitled to absolute immunity for her official acts.” judge
This statement refers to the legal principle of judicial immunity, which protects judges from being sued or prosecuted for actions taken in their official capacity. However, this immunity is not absolute in all circumstances.
A recent case involving Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan has brought this issue into the spotlight. Dugan was indicted on federal charges for allegedly obstructing immigration authorities and preventing the arrest of an individual at her courthouse. A group of 138 retired judges has argued that she should not be prosecuted because she is entitled to absolute immunity for her official acts. However, critics argue that her actions were outside the scope of her judicial duties and should not be protected under judicial immunity2.
The debate centers on whether her conduct—allegedly helping someone evade law enforcement—falls within the scope of her official judicial responsibilities. Some legal experts assert that judicial immunity applies only to decisions made on the bench, not actions taken outside of formal court proceedings.
They twist things around so much I feel like Norman in the Star Trek episode “I Mudd”.
More than 50million law abiding Americans want to see her prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, fired and de barred.
Sheltering criminal aliens is not an official act.
Anthony Blinken put this together?
She will get the charges dismissed by a friendly judge. She claims that she was simply managing her docket, which is an official act. Since that was an official act, she claims absolute immunity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.