Traitor Watch - The 45 & 47 Thread

Dekafox

Dekafox

Fabulously Foxy Dragon
Citizen
Found the details on it all, so this may help:

First per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Dugan :
On April 18, 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued an arrest warrant for Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a 30-year-old Mexican immigrant accused of misdemeanor battery, who was set to appear in court before Dugan.[6] According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Chief Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Carl Ashley notified Dugan of this arrest via email, to which Dugan responded saying "a warrant was not presented in the hallway on the sixth floor".[7] According to a court affidavit supporting the judge's arrest, Dugan was "visibly angry" when she learned that ICE agents were waiting outside her courtroom to arrest Flores-Ruiz. She then allegedly confronted the agents in the hallway, asked if they had a judicial warrant, and instructed them to speak to the court's chief judge after they informed her that they had an administrative warrant to detain Flores-Ruiz. While the agents were away, Dugan postponed Flores-Ruiz's hearing and directed him and his lawyer to leave through a private jury room exit instead of the public entryway.[8][9] Flores-Ruiz then left the building and engaged in a foot chase with ICE agents, who arrested him near the intersection of W. State Street and 10th Street.[10] Flores-Ruiz is being held at the Dodge Detention Facility in Juneau.[11]
Click to expand...
They had an administrative warrant, not a judicial warrant. This does not allow them to make arrests in a courthouse in some states(unsure if Wisconsin is one of those), but ICE has been doing so regardless, in other cases it seems.

Some information on the differences:
www.motionlaw.com

The Difference Between Judicial and Administrative Warrants | Motion Law

Understand The Difference Between Judicial and Administrative Warrants. Contact Motion Law today if you have any quesitons about immigration!
www.motionlaw.com www.motionlaw.com

ANd New York State is an example of one of the states that forbids it:
 

Xaaron

Active member
Citizen
Interesting. It looks like a Judicial Warrant is more appropriate in cases where forced entry of a private property is necessary to seize the subject. These must be approved by a judge/magistrate. An Administrative Warrant does not authorize such an entry, and ergo also is only issued by ICE officials, not a 3P judge/magistrate.

So, absent any other statute or ordinance, the issue turns on whether one has an expectation of privacy while appearing in open court. Which...no, you do not have that. Courthouses are open to the public, by definition, except for specific circumstances and specific types of hearings.

The closest local statements I can find are here: https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2025/04/23/murphys-law-wisconsin-battles-over-ice/

And...it doesn't seem like Wisconsin has a "Protect Our Courts" Act like New York, because the other judges and officials speaking out on behalf of Judge Dugan are not citing it when they do.

The closest thing is a memo apparently disseminated among the judges telling them they have to comply with a Judicial Warrant, but not with an Administrative Warrant. I.e., as officers of the court (judge, bailiff, deputies, police officers) they must act to detain individuals or provide information when requested to do so by a Judicial Warrant. But they are not required to comply with assisting the execution of an Administrative Warrant. However, "not required to comply" is very different from actively leading the subject of the warrant in evading ICE agents.

TLDR; she was not obligated to assist, but that doesn't mean she could actively interfere.
 
Rhinox

Rhinox

too old for this
Citizen
Xaaron said:
Interesting. It looks like a Judicial Warrant is more appropriate in cases where forced entry of a private property is necessary to seize the subject. These must be approved by a judge/magistrate. An Administrative Warrant does not authorize such an entry, and ergo also is only issued by ICE officials, not a 3P judge/magistrate.

So, absent any other statute or ordinance, the issue turns on whether one has an expectation of privacy while appearing in open court. Which...no, you do not have that. Courthouses are open to the public, by definition, except for specific circumstances and specific types of hearings.

The closest local statements I can find are here: https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2025/04/23/murphys-law-wisconsin-battles-over-ice/

And...it doesn't seem like Wisconsin has a "Protect Our Courts" Act like New York, because the other judges and officials speaking out on behalf of Judge Dugan are not citing it when they do.

The closest thing is a memo apparently disseminated among the judges telling them they have to comply with a Judicial Warrant, but not with an Administrative Warrant. I.e., as officers of the court (judge, bailiff, deputies, police officers) they must act to detain individuals or provide information when requested to do so by a Judicial Warrant. But they are not required to comply with assisting the execution of an Administrative Warrant. However, "not required to comply" is very different from actively leading the subject of the warrant in evading ICE agents.

TLDR; she was not obligated to assist, but that doesn't mean she could actively interfere.
Click to expand...
Mmm, not quite.

If this had been a judicial warrant, the judge would be up the proverbial creek. An administrative warrant has very little authority or backing. You can absolutely tell the agents to go suck eggs. Since it does not have judicial weight, you can point agents in a wrong direction or simply block them. A judicial warrant gets you into the door. An administrative warrant is 'if we see you in public, we can take you'. They can't enter homes, businesses or any place where they are not invited. They are extremely limited. And, from reading things, these agents were told to kick rocks and no do this in the courthouse.
Yeah, she could absolutely point out the back door while telling them to hug off. Come back with a real warrant.
 

Xaaron

Active member
Citizen
Rhinox said:
Mmm, not quite.

If this had been a judicial warrant, the judge would be up the proverbial creek. An administrative warrant has very little authority or backing. You can absolutely tell the agents to go suck eggs. Since it does not have judicial weight, you can point agents in a wrong direction or simply block them. A judicial warrant gets you into the door. An administrative warrant is 'if we see you in public, we can take you'. They can't enter homes, businesses or any place where they are not invited. They are extremely limited. And, from reading things, these agents were told to kick rocks and no do this in the courthouse.
Yeah, she could absolutely point out the back door while telling them to hug off. Come back with a real warrant.
Click to expand...

She's skating pretty close. Here's the statutes I found that she's charged under

Obstruction: "Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—Shall be..."

Concealment: "Whoever harbors or conceals any person for whose arrest a warrant or process has been issued under the provisions of any law of the United States, so as to prevent his discovery and arrest, after notice or knowledge of the fact that a warrant or process has been issued for the apprehension of such person, shall be..."

For concealment, I'd say it comes down to whether an Administrative Warrant qualifies as a "warrant" or "arrest" under the law. For obstruction...if these were otherwise open court proceedings, and she used her authority as a judge to refuse them entry, and then led the subject through another exit only accessible to judicial personnel...well, it's not getting dismissed on its face, absent some federal precedent I'm unfamiliar with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top Bottom