Judge’s conviction in ICE obstruction case vindicates courthouse arrests

The Trump administration landed its first major victory in its bid to quell anti-ICE resistance with the conviction of Hannah Dugan, the Wisconsin state judge who obstructed officers trying to arrest an illegal immigrant in her courtroom.

Brad D. Schimel, the U.S. attorney whose office led the prosecution, said the case was also a victory for the principle that immigration officers should be permitted to make arrests in courthouses.

That is increasingly a contentious matter, with states such as New York adopting bans on arrests in state courthouses.

Mr. Schimel suggested that such restrictions are misguided, as they remove a key location where arrests can be made in a controlled environment with reduced danger of weapons, which are prevented by security at courthouse doors, and other forms of chaos.

He said that’s as true for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers as it is for anyone else.

“Here they were carrying out their sworn responsibility to execute an arrest warrant. When they perform their duties, they should reasonably be entitled to do so in the safest possible conditions,” Mr. Schimel said.

“When someone, especially a sworn public official, puts them in unnecessary danger by obstructing those efforts to make an arrest as safely as possible, they must be held accountable,” he added.

Dugan was convicted by a federal jury on one felony count of obstruction.

The jury acquitted her on a misdemeanor charge of concealing a target from arrest.

After the verdict, Dugan’s legal team laid out its plans for an appeal.

“While we are disappointed in today’s outcome, the failure of the prosecution to secure convictions on both counts demonstrates the opportunity we have to clear Judge Dugan’s name and show she did nothing wrong in this matter,” the defense team said. “We have planned for this potential outcome and our defense of Judge Dugan is just beginning.”

The defense team issued a plea for donations to cover Dugan’s legal costs.

A team led by ICE and joined by FBI and Customs and Border Protection personnel went to the Milwaukee County courthouse on April 18 to try to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an illegal immigrant who had been deported but sneaked back into the U.S., a felony.

He was appearing before Dugan on an unrelated state battery charge.

Prosecutors said in their case to the jury that Dugan distracted the ICE team by challenging their civil arrest warrant and then telling officers they had to speak with the chief judge.

She then cut short the criminal proceeding against Mr. Flores-Ruiz and allowed him to exit her courtroom through a nonpublic door.

Dugan argued that her actions were within the scope of her duties as a judge.

She also said courthouses are special places where people need to be able to come and go without fearing entanglements in civil affairs.

Immigration proceedings are generally civil matters, with the consequence being deportation, rather than criminal matters.

“Whatever the accuracy of the government’s claim that there was a pending proceeding against E.F.R., he was out of reach in that courthouse on that day,” Dugan’s attorneys argued in briefs asking for a directed verdict of acquittal.

“In that place and on that day, the federal agents had no right to execute that civil warrant or otherwise serve civil process at all,” they wrote.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman rejected that argument.

The Department of Homeland Security said the conviction of a judge should serve as a warning for other anti-ICE behavior.

“Hopefully, this conviction will serve as an example to all others who would seek to do the same, because DHS will not be swayed from our mission to enforce the laws of the United States and protect the American people,” Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said.

Mr. Schimel, the U.S. attorney, said the case demonstrated that courthouses are not only acceptable but also preferred locations for arrests.

After Mr. Flores-Ruiz went out the side door of Dugan’s courtroom, he was able to make it onto the street. Members of the ICE team chased him, dodging through traffic, and then brought him down with a tackle.

Mr. Schimel said that sort of interaction is fraught with danger points and it was lucky that nobody was injured, including civilian bystanders.

Opponents of ICE courthouse arrests say they can discourage people from showing up for court, including defendants and reluctant witnesses, thereby imperiling prosecutions.

Local prosecutors in New York cited some such cases in defending the state’s ban on ICE arrests in its courthouses.

Brooklyn’s district attorney said domestic violence victims in “multiple cases” ended cooperation with authorities and refused to go to a courthouse to testify to grand juries because of fear of ICE arrests. Each of those cases had to be dismissed.

ICE said the fear is unfounded but is being stoked by its opponents. The agency says it doesn’t go to courthouses to arrest witnesses.

Rosemary Jenks, policy director at the Immigration Accountability Project, called the courthouse bans “ridiculous.” She said those supporting courthouse restrictions are the ones pushing ICE to make arrests in communities, where officers are often likely to nab more than just the person they were targeting.

“Do you want the safety and security and non-chaos of ICE going into a courthouse and detaining an unarmed person in a controlled environment, or do you want them to just go out into communities and find who they find?” she said. “You can choose safety, or you can choose chaos. And they’re choosing chaos.”

The Justice Department sued earlier this year to stop New York’s courthouse ban.

U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino, an Obama appointee, rebuffed the lawsuit, saying the state had a right to block ICE. She said that doing otherwise would be allowing the feds to “commandeer” the state’s police for their own purposes.

She ruled that because New York law enforcement provides security at the courthouse and New York officials publish the schedules of expected appearances for cases, ICE is taking advantage of those efforts to make its arrests.

“Compelling New York to allow federal immigration authorities to reap the benefits of the work of state employees is no different than permitting the federal government to commandeer state officials directly in furtherance of federal objectives,” she wrote.

Matthew O’Brien, a former immigration judge and now deputy director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, called courthouse bans “absurd.”

He said immigration is the one area where states want to thwart the federal government.

Mr. O’Brien said it was significant that Dugan was convicted by a jury in Wisconsin, a politically moderate state.

“It sends a signal that a jury looked at this and said this judge was engaging in behavior and involved herself in trying to prohibit the exercise of a legitimate federal authority,” he said.