Court Advised to Reject Indicted Judge Dugan’s Immunity Defense

The charges against Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan shouldn’t be dismissed, a US magistrate judge recommended Monday, finding that judicial immunity from civil prosecution doesn’t extend to her criminal case.

Dugan was arrested by the FBI in April for allegedly helping a migrant escape federal immigration authorities. She allegedly ushered him out of her courtroom through a non-public hallway so he could avoid the immigration officials who appeared at her courtroom to arrest him.

“Perhaps in some future case the Supreme Court will expand the judicial immunity principles it has so firmly established in the civil context to the criminal prosecution of judges as Dugan urges,” Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph wrote. “At this time, however, I am unconvinced that either the common law or the Trump decision provide the authority for applying the civil framework of absolute judicial immunity for judicial acts to the prosecution of judges for crimes that relate to official duties.”

The final decision will come from presiding Judge Lynn Adelman of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Dugan argued that there were only a few exceptions to a judge’s immunity from prosecution in criminal cases. She argued judges that violate the law while acting in an official capacity that involves self-dealing aren’t exempt from prosecution, like the two judges in Pennsylvania who were prosecuted for accepting kickbacks for sending juveniles to particular private detention facilities.

Her actions were instead selfless and contained “no hint of self-dealing,” she argued.

Joseph disagreed that enrichment was an important feature of judicial immunity: “What matters is whether the judge, even in performing her official duties, is accused of committing a crime.”

Joseph went on to distinguish the US Supreme Court’s finding in Trump v US, which said the president is “entitled to the same immunity from prosecution for official conduct that judges have long held.” Joseph noted the case says nothing about criminal immunity for judicial acts and provides absolute criminal immunity for only a president’s “core constitutional powers,” including pardons and vetoes.

The case is USA v Dugan, E.D. Wis., No. 25-cr-89, 7/7/25.