Video Shows Milwaukee Judge Interacting With ICE Agents Before Migrant Arrest
A newly released surveillance video has placed Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan at the center of a growing legal and political firestorm after she was indicted on federal charges for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade arrest by federal authorities. The incident occurred on April 18, shortly after a courtroom proceeding involving 33-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a previously deported Mexican national with an active federal warrant.
According to prosecutors, as Flores-Ruiz exited the courtroom following a routine hearing, federal immigration agents were waiting in the corridor outside to take him into custody. However, what happened next has shocked both the legal community and the public. Surveillance footage reportedly shows Judge Dugan actively engaging with the agents, allegedly diverting their attention long enough for Flores-Ruiz to be discreetly guided out of the courthouse through a secured, staff-only exit—a door not accessible to the general public.
By the time the agents realized what had happened, Flores-Ruiz was gone. He was apprehended several blocks away after a brief manhunt, but the controversy surrounding Judge Dugan’s alleged involvement erupted immediately.
Federal investigators allege that Judge Dugan used her authority and access to court infrastructure to facilitate an illegal escape from federal custody—actions that, if proven true, amount to obstruction of justice. The indictment charges her with willfully interfering in a lawful arrest and misusing her judicial position to hinder federal law enforcement operations.
Judge Dugan, a seasoned jurist known for her advocacy on behalf of underserved communities, has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Through her attorney, she claims her actions were misunderstood and insists she believed she was acting within the bounds of judicial discretion. Her legal team has raised the defense of judicial immunity, a doctrine that generally protects judges from prosecution for actions taken in the course of their official duties.
However, legal experts are divided on whether that immunity applies in this case. Many argue that if Dugan intentionally facilitated the escape of a wanted individual—particularly through the use of restricted court access—such behavior could fall far outside the protective boundaries of her judicial role.
The case has attracted national attention and sparked fierce debate over immigration enforcement, sanctuary policies, and the limits of judicial authority. Dugan has been suspended from the bench pending the outcome of the case, a move that has prompted strong reactions from both her supporters and critics.
Supporters say Dugan was likely attempting to prevent what she perceived as a harsh and dehumanizing arrest in a courthouse setting—especially given Flores-Ruiz’s prior deportation and pending legal matters. They argue that immigration arrests in courtrooms deter undocumented individuals from attending hearings or cooperating with the justice system, fearing detention.
Opponents, however, claim her actions, if proven, represent a serious breach of ethics and a direct obstruction of law enforcement. They insist that judges must remain neutral arbiters and not interfere with federal operations, regardless of their personal views on immigration.
Meanwhile, Flores-Ruiz faces a complicated legal path of his own. Already deported once, he is now charged with illegal reentry into the United States, a federal offense that carries serious prison time. Additionally, he faces unrelated state charges in Wisconsin, though authorities have not disclosed the nature of those offenses publicly.
As of now, Judge Dugan is free on bond and awaits her next court appearance. The trial promises to draw significant attention, not only because of the serious nature of the allegations but also because it sits at the volatile intersection of immigration policy, federal authority, and judicial accountability.
What remains clear is that this case is more than just a courtroom controversy—it’s a test of the delicate balance between justice, compassion, and the rule of law in an increasingly divided nation.