I never heard of RAICES. It was just mentioned in passing by you at the same importance as ACLU. So I looked into the organization a bit more. For others their website is Raicestexas.org . And I made a small donation.
Also I know several prominent immirant attorneys. One is nationally famous and I just saw that he recently been added to the Rameysa Ozturk team. Proud to call Marty a friend!
These are tough times but I am not sure the Trump administration fully understands … Americans will NEVER SUBMIT to this tyranny. We the People will resist for as long as it takes. Baby we were born to run.
Well said, Jeanine! These times indeed require courage and clarity and you're right, people committed to democracy won't just quietly accept authoritarian tactics. Together, our resistance makes all the difference. Every day resistance grows stronger, especially as they escalate their authoritarian tactics.
Thank you for a fair and reasonable approach to go forward. We need to know what to watch for so we don't lose our valuable freedoms. I feel for this judge and her situation. I pray for her safety from here forward and that no other judges have to go through this. These ICE people need to learn some basic values of being human in stressful situations. Bless her and I hope the young gentleman gets his rights heard. Justice needs to win for all of us.
A bit of escalation occurred and is summarized in this Wisconsin Examiner article. The escalation is from the three elected Republicans who govern the local judge who spoke out. They convict in the media without any respect for her office.
Good question, Jon. Judge Dugan was arrested for allegedly aiding Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented immigrant appearing in her courtroom on a minor misdemeanor charge. Specifically, authorities claim she allowed him to use a side exit from the courthouse to avoid ICE agents who were waiting outside her courtroom to detain him. The bigger concern here, beyond this single case, is the dangerous precedent it sets: targeting judges for actions they take while performing judicial duties threatens judicial independence itself.
Interesting. The way the trumpsters have gone about fighting the courts and individual judges suggests that they may press a variety of legal issues having to do with recent precedent around what actions by a judge might be protected within the scope of a judge’s official acts . . .
CR...I usually abhor the immigration policies and the way the enforcement actions are carried out by this administration. In this particular circumstance, however, I can see the government's case, and don't have an issue with it.
First, the judge had to have known ICE agents were waiting outside her courtroom for this defendant, otherwise she would not have allowed him to leave via a secured exit door available only to courtroom personnel.
This only occurred at the conclusion of the hearing, during which the judged only ruled on the misdemeanor case before her, which involved this defendant. She issued no ruling with ANYTHING involving the Federal government. The agents waiting outside showed the proper respect by waiting there until the conclusion of the hearing, and did not interfer with a proceeding in a State court's jurisdiction. I would have taken issue had they done so otherwise.
As a black robed wearing jurist, surely the judge knew that her actions clearly crossed a legal line, placing her in legal jeopardy.
I can understand her sympathy for the defendant, but her actions in THIS instance, and only this instance, as a judge was wrong. Just calling balls and strikes here.
We Americans created our current political situation through apathy, misinformation, and outright stupidity, be it our last election, or the plurality, during the past quarter century. If we are to preserve the founding ideals of this country, it will be up to us to change it. We get the government we deserve
Thank you for this thoughtful and detailed response, Eduardo. I appreciate your engagement on this nuanced issue. You’re absolutely right that judges must uphold the law and exercise appropriate judgment within their role.
One important legal distinction here, though, involves the type of warrant presented by ICE. According to reports, ICE agents had an administrative warrant, which differs significantly from a judicial warrant signed by a judge. Administrative warrants are issued by ICE officials themselves, without judicial oversight or approval. They don’t hold the same legal authority as judicial warrants, meaning they typically do not grant ICE agents authority to compel cooperation from local law enforcement or access to non-public areas without consent.
Judge Dugan questioned this very point, which complicates the narrative significantly. The broader issue here, therefore, isn’t simply whether she acted correctly in a procedural sense (which certainly will be resolved through the proper legal process), but rather the potential precedent of arresting a sitting judge based on their actions related to an administrative, rather than judicial, warrant. Such actions could indeed threaten judicial independence and represent a troubling expansion of executive power into the judicial branch.
Your call for accountability is crucial as no public official should be above the law. But accountability mechanisms should be clear, judicially overseen, and free from political intimidation. The use of administrative warrants in such cases presents legitimate concerns about potential executive overreach and intimidation.
Thanks again for contributing to this important discussion—I appreciate your perspective and careful consideration of these complexities.
Exactly, it’s hard not to read it that way. Whether intentional or not, actions like these send a chilling message to judges, signaling potential consequences for decisions that don’t align with executive demands. Thanks, as always, for engaging thoughtfully and highlighting what’s at stake.
I never heard of RAICES. It was just mentioned in passing by you at the same importance as ACLU. So I looked into the organization a bit more. For others their website is Raicestexas.org . And I made a small donation.
Also I know several prominent immirant attorneys. One is nationally famous and I just saw that he recently been added to the Rameysa Ozturk team. Proud to call Marty a friend!
These are tough times but I am not sure the Trump administration fully understands … Americans will NEVER SUBMIT to this tyranny. We the People will resist for as long as it takes. Baby we were born to run.
Well said, Jeanine! These times indeed require courage and clarity and you're right, people committed to democracy won't just quietly accept authoritarian tactics. Together, our resistance makes all the difference. Every day resistance grows stronger, especially as they escalate their authoritarian tactics.
Thank you for a fair and reasonable approach to go forward. We need to know what to watch for so we don't lose our valuable freedoms. I feel for this judge and her situation. I pray for her safety from here forward and that no other judges have to go through this. These ICE people need to learn some basic values of being human in stressful situations. Bless her and I hope the young gentleman gets his rights heard. Justice needs to win for all of us.
A bit of escalation occurred and is summarized in this Wisconsin Examiner article. The escalation is from the three elected Republicans who govern the local judge who spoke out. They convict in the media without any respect for her office.
https://wisconsinexaminer.com/2025/05/02/sawyer-county-judge-condemned-praised-for-alleged-response-to-judge-dugans-arrest-in-milwaukee/
Would love to know more about what exactly she did that they decided warranted arrest.
Good question, Jon. Judge Dugan was arrested for allegedly aiding Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented immigrant appearing in her courtroom on a minor misdemeanor charge. Specifically, authorities claim she allowed him to use a side exit from the courthouse to avoid ICE agents who were waiting outside her courtroom to detain him. The bigger concern here, beyond this single case, is the dangerous precedent it sets: targeting judges for actions they take while performing judicial duties threatens judicial independence itself.
Interesting. The way the trumpsters have gone about fighting the courts and individual judges suggests that they may press a variety of legal issues having to do with recent precedent around what actions by a judge might be protected within the scope of a judge’s official acts . . .
CR...I usually abhor the immigration policies and the way the enforcement actions are carried out by this administration. In this particular circumstance, however, I can see the government's case, and don't have an issue with it.
First, the judge had to have known ICE agents were waiting outside her courtroom for this defendant, otherwise she would not have allowed him to leave via a secured exit door available only to courtroom personnel.
This only occurred at the conclusion of the hearing, during which the judged only ruled on the misdemeanor case before her, which involved this defendant. She issued no ruling with ANYTHING involving the Federal government. The agents waiting outside showed the proper respect by waiting there until the conclusion of the hearing, and did not interfer with a proceeding in a State court's jurisdiction. I would have taken issue had they done so otherwise.
As a black robed wearing jurist, surely the judge knew that her actions clearly crossed a legal line, placing her in legal jeopardy.
I can understand her sympathy for the defendant, but her actions in THIS instance, and only this instance, as a judge was wrong. Just calling balls and strikes here.
We Americans created our current political situation through apathy, misinformation, and outright stupidity, be it our last election, or the plurality, during the past quarter century. If we are to preserve the founding ideals of this country, it will be up to us to change it. We get the government we deserve
Thank you for this thoughtful and detailed response, Eduardo. I appreciate your engagement on this nuanced issue. You’re absolutely right that judges must uphold the law and exercise appropriate judgment within their role.
One important legal distinction here, though, involves the type of warrant presented by ICE. According to reports, ICE agents had an administrative warrant, which differs significantly from a judicial warrant signed by a judge. Administrative warrants are issued by ICE officials themselves, without judicial oversight or approval. They don’t hold the same legal authority as judicial warrants, meaning they typically do not grant ICE agents authority to compel cooperation from local law enforcement or access to non-public areas without consent.
Judge Dugan questioned this very point, which complicates the narrative significantly. The broader issue here, therefore, isn’t simply whether she acted correctly in a procedural sense (which certainly will be resolved through the proper legal process), but rather the potential precedent of arresting a sitting judge based on their actions related to an administrative, rather than judicial, warrant. Such actions could indeed threaten judicial independence and represent a troubling expansion of executive power into the judicial branch.
Your call for accountability is crucial as no public official should be above the law. But accountability mechanisms should be clear, judicially overseen, and free from political intimidation. The use of administrative warrants in such cases presents legitimate concerns about potential executive overreach and intimidation.
Thanks again for contributing to this important discussion—I appreciate your perspective and careful consideration of these complexities.
I take it as a blatant message that judges will rule the way the Misadministration wants them to or face intimidation or arrest.
Exactly, it’s hard not to read it that way. Whether intentional or not, actions like these send a chilling message to judges, signaling potential consequences for decisions that don’t align with executive demands. Thanks, as always, for engaging thoughtfully and highlighting what’s at stake.
I’d say that this is a pretty fair deduction!