ICE Has Started to Arrest Judges

[BabyBoomer50s]

Sorry Dems. She’s not above the law

Federal grand jury indicts a Wisconsin judge in immigration case, allowing charges against her to continue​

Associated Press
Tue, May 13, 2025 at 6:53 PM EDT

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Federal grand jury indicts a Wisconsin judge in immigration case, allowing charges against her to continue.

 

[ll74]

Sorry Dems. She’s not above the law

Federal grand jury indicts a Wisconsin judge in immigration case, allowing charges against her to continue​

Associated Press
Tue, May 13, 2025 at 6:53 PM EDT

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Federal grand jury indicts a Wisconsin judge in immigration case, allowing charges against her to continue.

She also is innocent until proven guilty.

Should be exciting to see all the MAGA ficks whip themselves into a frenzy and then be disappointed when she's acquitted.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

She also is innocent until proven guilty.

Should be exciting to see all the MAGA ficks whip themselves into a frenzy and then be disappointed when she's acquitted.

Either way, she exercised incredibly poor judgment and damaged if not destroyed her reputation and career.

 

[ll74]

Either way, she exercised incredibly poor judgment and damaged if not destroyed her reputation and career.

Yes, you have an opinion.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes, you have an opinion.

You busted me…sometimes my biases show no matter how much I try to conceal them.

 

[ll74]

You busted me…sometimes my biases show no matter how much I try to conceal them.

I have a larger issue with an administration whose goal is to put on a show with dehumanization and numbers than i do with a judge faced with an unexpected situation. Even if she's convicted, she doesn't deserve much and her usefulness to this administration is only good if they throw the book at her.

dear leader demands blood for the masses.

(That would've been a fun movie quote yet here we are in reality.....and it's the truth of this President)

 

[Bodington]

The Grand Jury has now actually indicted the Wisconsin Judge on two charges pursuant to her arrest by ICE. I understand that the Dems and their lapdog lackies, the MSM, view this as a chilling effect on our judicial system, a danderous precedent indeed. Now I recall that when Trump was indicted the Dems reaction was "No one is above the law." I guess there are some exceptions after all in the minds of the Dems.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I have a larger issue with an administration whose goal is to put on a show with dehumanization and numbers than i do with a judge faced with an unexpected situation. Even if she's convicted, she doesn't deserve much and her usefulness to this administration is only good if they throw the book at her.

dear leader demands blood for the masses.

(That would've been a fun movie quote yet here we are in reality.....and it's the truth of this President)

I get that you have issues with the administration. The campaign promise was to restore our southern border, and deportation of those who cut in front of the line or abused their privilege was part of that promise. It’s an effective deterrent. Border encounters are down 93%. State and local governments who declared themselves “sanctuaries” from immigration laws are rethinking their policies.

You were among those who said comprehensive immigration legislation was required. Trump said all we needed was a new president.

 

[ll74]

I get that you have issues with the administration. The campaign promise was to restore our southern border, and deportation of those who cut in front of the line or abused their privilege was part of that promise.

Yes, and they could've done that without declaring an emergency to bypass process and become an authoritarian.

Instead, they are more concerned with numbers than actually giving proper process it's due

And it means people who shouldn't be fucked continue to be fucked.

It also means that courts are slowing their process down even further.

It’s an effective deterrent. Border encounters are down 93%. State and local governments who declared themselves “sanctuaries” from immigration laws are rethinking their policies.

Effectiveness doesn't mean ethical or needed.

One man literally could've been deported as required by law to anywhere but El Salvador, it incompetence sent him elsewhere.

They use an act that has no business being used and fuck over even more people.

You were among those who said comprehensive immigration legislation was required. Trump said all we needed was a new president.

And I'm still correct.

Unless you just want a bandaid.

Then i guess not

 

[Politruk]

the Dems and their lapdog lackies, the MSM

You are an idiot.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes, and they could've done that without declaring an emergency to bypass process and become an authoritarian.

Instead, they are more concerned with numbers than actually giving proper process it's due

And it means people who shouldn't be fucked continue to be fucked.

It also means that courts are slowing their process down even further.


Effectiveness doesn't mean ethical or needed.

One man literally could've been deported as required by law to anywhere but El Salvador, it incompetence sent him elsewhere.

They use an act that has no business being used and fuck over even more people.


And I'm still correct.

Unless you just want a bandaid.

Then i guess not

Yes, Garcia could have and should have been deported elsewhere. He also could have behaved a little better and avoided being accused by his wife of abuse and driving a vehicle without a valid license carrying 8 guys who all lived at one address in a vehicle owned by a human trafficker.

 

[RoryN]

BabyBoomer50s calling others "racist":

Keep defending your jew-hating pals you racist POS.

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/israel-hamas-pb-tribal-fight.1596886/post-98830842

Like many progressive Democrats, she is an unhinged racist.

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...-racist-comments-galore.1603711/post-98279471


***

BabyBoomer50s being racist:

[Elizabeth Holms riots] Geez, the case hasn’t even gone to the jury and the rioters in CA are already looting the high end fashion stores. If the verdict goes the wrong way the streets of Walnut Creek, San Francisco, and LA could be filled with blondes in black turtlenecks. Not even going to guess how this would all go down if she were black.

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/elizabeth-holmes-riots.1556275/

 

[ll74]

Yes, Garcia could have and should have been deported elsewhere.

If he had due process, he would've been.

Good on you to admit that

He also could have behaved a little better and avoided being accused by his wife of abuse and driving a vehicle without a valid license carrying 8 guys who all lived at one address in a vehicle owned by a human trafficker.

Yes, the government fucked up and you continue to focus on him.

awesome job

 

[Ciceri]

Yet the corrupt Aileen Cannon continues at her cushy job

 

[tinta]

Federal Grand Jury Indicts Wisconsin Judge for Allegedly Helping Illegal Immigrant Avoid Arrest​

 

[ll74]

Federal Grand Jury Indicts Wisconsin Judge for Allegedly Helping Illegal Immigrant Avoid Arrest​

That was posted in this thread already

 

[Bray123]

It's a shame she didn't smear her shit on the courtroom walls and smash the windows.

Trump would have given her cash compensation.

 

[Rightguide]

Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan claims ‘judicial immunity’ from prosecution​

Attorneys for Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against her Wednesday morning, citing judicial immunity for her official acts.


By: Steve Chamraz
Posted 9:41 AM, May 14, 2025

and last updated 2:41 PM, May 14, 2025
MILWAUKEE — Attorneys for Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against her Wednesday morning, citing judicial immunity for her official acts.

"Immunity is not a defense to the prosecution to be determined later by a jury or court; it is an absolute bar to the prosecution," her legal team wrote in a 7-page filing.

https://www.tmj4.com/news/milwaukee...gan-claims-judicial-immunity-from-prosecution

It's total BS. Judicial immunity only protects her from civil suits, not criminal prosecution. Here are four SCOTUS decisions that say so:


1. Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 335 (1872)
This foundational case established that judges are absolutely immune from civil liability for judicial acts performed within their jurisdiction, even if such acts are alleged to have been done maliciously or corruptly. The Court emphasized that this immunity is essential to ensure judicial independence and protect judges from vexatious lawsuits by dissatisfied litigants.

2. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)
In Pierson, the Supreme Court held that the common-law doctrine of judicial immunity was not abolished by § 1983. The Court reasoned that judges should not be inhibited in their decision-making by the fear of personal liability, reaffirming that judicial immunity applies to civil suits for damages. However, the Court noted that this immunity does not extend to criminal liability, and judges can be prosecuted criminally for unlawful conduct.

3. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)
In this case, the Court reinforced the principle that judges are immune from civil suits for actions taken in their judicial capacity, even if such actions are alleged to be in error or done with ill intent. The decision underscored that the scope of judicial immunity is broad in civil contexts to preserve judicial independence. However, it implicitly acknowledged that this immunity does not shield judges from criminal prosecution for actions outside their judicial role.

and I'll add

4. O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488 (1974)

Key Holdings Related to Immunity:

The Court ruled that the injunctive relief sought was improper because it would result in an impermissible ongoing federal audit of state judicial proceedings, violating principles of federalism and comity.

The Court emphasized that judicial officers are generally immune from civil actions arising from their judicial acts, even when constitutional violations are alleged.

Importantly, the Court noted that criminal liability remains a possible avenue for misconduct by judges:

“The judicial system of the United States and of the individual States provides for criminal penalties for willful or malicious misconduct by judges.”

All of this was discussed in a 2023 Harvard Law Review article on 42 U.S.C. § 1983

https://harvardlawreview.org/print/...perspective-on-§-1983/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

So yes, Judge Dugan is quite overweight, but it could be because she is full of crap.

​

 

[ll74]

Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan claims ‘judicial immunity’ from prosecution​

Attorneys for Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against her Wednesday morning, citing judicial immunity for her official acts.


By: Steve Chamraz
Posted 9:41 AM, May 14, 2025

and last updated 2:41 PM, May 14, 2025
MILWAUKEE — Attorneys for Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against her Wednesday morning, citing judicial immunity for her official acts.

"Immunity is not a defense to the prosecution to be determined later by a jury or court; it is an absolute bar to the prosecution," her legal team wrote in a 7-page filing.

https://www.tmj4.com/news/milwaukee...gan-claims-judicial-immunity-from-prosecution

It's total BS. Judicial immunity only protects her from civil suits, not criminal prosecution. Here are four SCOTUS decisions that say so:


1. Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 335 (1872)
This foundational case established that judges are absolutely immune from civil liability for judicial acts performed within their jurisdiction, even if such acts are alleged to have been done maliciously or corruptly. The Court emphasized that this immunity is essential to ensure judicial independence and protect judges from vexatious lawsuits by dissatisfied litigants.

2. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)
In Pierson, the Supreme Court held that the common-law doctrine of judicial immunity was not abolished by § 1983. The Court reasoned that judges should not be inhibited in their decision-making by the fear of personal liability, reaffirming that judicial immunity applies to civil suits for damages. However, the Court noted that this immunity does not extend to criminal liability, and judges can be prosecuted criminally for unlawful conduct.

3. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)
In this case, the Court reinforced the principle that judges are immune from civil suits for actions taken in their judicial capacity, even if such actions are alleged to be in error or done with ill intent. The decision underscored that the scope of judicial immunity is broad in civil contexts to preserve judicial independence. However, it implicitly acknowledged that this immunity does not shield judges from criminal prosecution for actions outside their judicial role.

and I'll add

4. O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488 (1974)

Key Holdings Related to Immunity:

The Court ruled that the injunctive relief sought was improper because it would result in an impermissible ongoing federal audit of state judicial proceedings, violating principles of federalism and comity.

The Court emphasized that judicial officers are generally immune from civil actions arising from their judicial acts, even when constitutional violations are alleged.

Importantly, the Court noted that criminal liability remains a possible avenue for misconduct by judges:

“The judicial system of the United States and of the individual States provides for criminal penalties for willful or malicious misconduct by judges.”

All of this was discussed in a 2023 Harvard Law Review article on 42 U.S.C. § 1983

https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-136/judicial-immunity-at-the-second-founding-a-new-perspective-on-§-1983/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

So yes, Judge Dugan is quite overweight, but it could be because she is full of crap.

​

You aren't misogynistic or biased.

Please, give us more insight on the topic.

 

[Rightguide]

She also is innocent until proven guilty.

Should be exciting to see all the MAGA ficks whip themselves into a frenzy and then be disappointed when she's acquitted.

She violated Federal law.

 

[Rightguide]

You aren't misogynistic or biased.

Please, give us more insight on the topic.

So how are corrupt judges protected by immunity in your mind?

 

[ll74]

She violated Federal law.

Are you on the jury for her trial?

Should be fun when you question her on her weight. I'm sure you'll convince the jury

 

[Politruk]

the Dems and their lapdog lackies, the MSM

You are an idiot.

 

[ll74]

So how are corrupt judges protected by immunity in your mind?

I've not argued immunity.

 

[Politruk]

Yes, Garcia could have and should have been deported elsewhere. He also could have behaved a little better and avoided being accused by his wife of abuse and driving a vehicle without a valid license carrying 8 guys who all lived at one address in a vehicle owned by a human trafficker.

Coyotes are not human traffickers.