>> All right. Congressman Mark Pocan, thanks for your time
today. >> Yeah. Thank you.
>> The Wisconsin Supreme Court this week announced they were
temporarily suspending Milwaukee County Judge Hanna Dugan, quote,
in order to uphold the public's confidence in the courts of this
state, Dugan was arrested and charged in federal court with
obstructing federal immigration officials in their efforts to
arrest an illegal immigrant. Following an appearance in her
courtroom. Reactions to these events have remained political.
Democratic U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin said, quote, the
president's administration arresting a sitting judge is a
gravely serious and drastic move. While details of this
exact case remain minimal, this action fits into the deeply
concerning patterns of this president's lawless behavior and
undermining courts and Congress's checks on his power.
While Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said, quote,
these are serious charges, and it's important to remember no
one is above the law. We are reviewing the situation, and the
charges result in a conviction. We will act. Judge Dugan's
decision to hide a dangerous illegal immigrant was
irresponsible and put public safety at risk. Joining us now
is UW-Madison professor emeritus Howard Schweber. Thanks for your
time. >> Well, thanks for having me.
>> So what is your opinion of the case put forward by the
federal government? Did they have grounds to make an arrest
here? >> Well, we have to keep in mind
that the only facts we have to go on are those contained in the
complaint. Right. And there's a reason we don't take complaints
at face value. That's why we have trials. So based but based
only on those facts. And assuming everything that is
alleged in the complaint is true. Yeah, they've got a pretty
strong case. The Ice agents were in the public areas of the
courthouse where law enforcement is permitted by both law and
tradition, to make arrests. It appears the judge very much went
out of her way to help this guy evade arrest. It was not a
matter of simply like pointing to a door. It was. There was
much more to it than that. According to the allegations. So
if these facts bear out, and if she is convicted on the basis of
the complaint as it stands, I would say that the case against
her is pretty strong. At that point, I think there would be no
doubt that the state Supreme Court, as well as the state
legislature, would take action to remove her from the bench.
>> Now her case will play out in federal court. But what's the
impact in other courtrooms? Is there any doubt that the Trump
administration was trying to send a message to all judges
everywhere in these actions? >> No, there's no doubt about
that at all. It's worth remembering that in his first
term, Trump also had a judge in Massachusetts arrested. It's
worth also pointing out that this the decision by the state
Supreme Court to suspend Judge Dugan was 7 to 0, was unanimous.
It's temporary, and it's a suspension with pay. So we
shouldn't overstate. We are where we are at in the specifics
of the case, but the political environment is exactly what you
just raised. The Trump administration has been going
after and trying to intimidate federal judges from the
beginning with threats of impeachment and threats to shut
down courthouses. I don't think it's a coincidence that this
week, the Trump administration announced an executive order
targeting state and local officials who interfere with
deportation efforts and the manner of the arrest was really
egregious. Handcuffs and photographs and publicity. You
know, the perp walk element of the whole thing that was very
clearly an esthetic intended to send a message that's of a
threat to judges everywhere, state and local judges
everywhere, you know, don't get in our way. It won't end well
for you. >> Some law enforcement
officials, like here in Dane County, specifically avoid
asking questions around immigration status because
they've said they don't want potential witnesses or victims
to feel intimidated or have concerns about showing up at
courtrooms. What will this mean in terms of justice? In a lot of
other cases that have nothing to do with this particular issue?
>> Well, that's the policy side of this, and it's absolutely,
you know, again, you've raised exactly the right concern. It
doesn't work to simply exclude a category of people and say, if
you participate in our court system in any way, you know, you
may be subject to arrest, that's going to make them go
underground, and that's going to make it harder for the police
and for prosecutors in criminal cases and in civil cases,
though, you know, cases of, for example, example, domestic
abuse, which is one of the allegations that's involved in
this case, it just gets very much harder for the rule of law
to be maintained for people to be protected. So on policy
grounds, you know, there's a really good reason why in the
past, law enforcement is very has been very hesitant to
operate inside of courtroom courthouses and especially
courtrooms. Again, we have to come back to two key points
here. One, if every single one of the facts alleged is exactly
as the federal government says it is, this is a strong case.
And this judge acted at least recklessly. And two, the
unanimous opinion by the state Supreme Court, I think, shows
that that court is very, very concerned not to see this become
a disruption to the court system as a whole, not to see these
kind of conflicts spreading across the state, but the
background politics of intimidation of state and local
officials and of judges in particular, I think, is in
everyone's mind and rightly so. >> Now, we spoke with one of the
nine chief judges in Wisconsin, and they said they're waiting
for the director of state courts or the chief of chiefs to speak
out. But we've heard nothing so far other than this one
statement by the Wisconsin Supreme Court and is the silence
pretty loud in that situation, or do they have an obligation to
speak out publicly or give guidance to judges in this
situation? >> Well, I don't know about an
obligation. So the big question is this gets rather technical.
The case involved an administrative warrant,
administrative warrants, unlike warrants signed by judges, do
not permit law enforcement to enter into private spaces
without permission. There's a kind of background understanding
that courtrooms are treated as private spaces, but that the
public areas of courthouses are not. And that's an established
understanding. That's not brand new. I think it would be useful
for the chief judge to come up with a clear set of guidelines
for judges around the state, but certainly part of the problem is
has to be a concern of pushback from the federal government and
from federal authorities. If the feds don't like the rules that
Wisconsin comes up with. So there may be negotiations going
on behind the scenes to try and get that worked out. I do we had
we've seen one Wisconsin judge already threatened to
effectively shut down her courtroom in the absence of
guidance. You know, that's another thing that could spread
and that would be a problem. So I expect that a statement will
be forthcoming, and I expect that it will have some detailed
rules and policies. I think the one thing that's very clear, the
state Supreme Court has made very clear is once those
policies are in place, they will be enforced.
>> All right, Professor >> All right, Professor