241–250 of 1001 posts
Milwaukee journal is providing great coverage: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/breaking/2025/04/25/milw...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I updated my post with new information from the updated article, and in the context of that I think you're pretty much right. It sounds like the judge basically said "you need permission to arrest someone in the middle of my hearing, go get it" and then didn't change anything about the process of their hearing while that permission was being obtained. This was definitely not them being helpful , but I'm incredibly do…
Successful prosecution isn't needed, the harassment and incurring high legal fees will discourage a dozen other judges who might be less than boot-licklingly helpful to the autocrat.
Let's say I murder someone. I definitely did it, and there's plenty of evidence. What's stopping my hypothetical ICE buddy from showing up at my first court appearance, arresting me, and deporting me to a country without extradition by claiming that I am an "illegal immigrant"?
If you're as incensed about this as I am, you can call the Milwaukee County Republican Party HQ at 414-897-7202 and let them know what you think. They're inclusive and open to dialog per their page at https://www.mkegop.com/ , so I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.
> He accused Dugan of “intentionally misdirecting” federal agents who arrived at the courthouse to detain an immigrant who was set to appear before her in an unrelated proceeding. It sounds like the arrest isn't because of any official act of the judge, but rather over them either not telling the ICE agents where the person was or giving them the wrong information about their location. There are some pretty broad law…
> I.e. the ICE agents showed up in the middle of a court proceeding, and the judge said they'd need to get permission from the chief judge before they could interrupt proceedings. The judge then didn't stop the defendant from leaving once the proceeding was done. Since there were multiple agents (the reports and Patel's post all say "agents" plural) they could have left one at the courtroom, or outside, rather than a…
You cannot be held by law enforcement or the judiciary for being accused of a civil violation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s more weird that the person being a “sitting judge” is any party of the equation. At the end of the day judges are just people. I would be more worried about a system that proceeded differently because they were a judge.
This makes absolutely zero sense. She was arrested because of her actions (or rather, alleged inaction) in court, as a judge. She is not "just a person" in this case. I'm struggling with the dishonesty on grand display by some of the comments in this thread.
This feels like a “break glass in case of emergency” kind of moment. Sure there are no details yet, but I’m trying to imagine details which would make me think “that arrest makes sense.” If I were in Milwaukee I’d be in the streets.
[flagged]
That is far from clear. The facts are emerging slowly; so the sequence described below may ultimately be inaccurate… but, ICE agents interrupted a court hearing. The judge presiding over the hearing asked the agents to leave. When they returned, the subject whom the ICE officers were seeking had already left. Is there a law that compels a judge (or anyone, for that matter) to remand someone sought by ICE to their custody? I genuinely don’t know, but were I put in a similar situation I would not hand anyone over to ICE custody given their terrible human rights history. Laws be damned; they and the administration whom they represent are moral failures.
> He accused Dugan of “intentionally misdirecting” federal agents who arrived at the courthouse to detain an immigrant who was set to appear before her in an unrelated proceeding. It sounds like the arrest isn't because of any official act of the judge, but rather over them either not telling the ICE agents where the person was or giving them the wrong information about their location. There are some pretty broad law…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even if I wanted to arrest a sitting judge, it would have to be an act of gross malfeasance to motivate me to even consider arrest. This logic projects rationality onto an administration that does not merit such assumptions.
I think it’s more weird that the person being a “sitting judge” is any party of the equation. At the end of the day judges are just people. I would be more worried about a system that proceeded differently because they were a judge.
Executive branch arrests of members of judiciary are not to be taken lightly. There are many ways to deal with these situations and this is extraordinarily far from normal. All you can do is diversify your US-based investments and get travel visas while you still can. If you are tempted to downvote, you could make a better point by finding comparable examples under any other modern president.