Even many of those who’ve come to expect the worst from the Trump administration were taken aback on Friday when the FBI arrested a county judge in Milwaukee, alleging that she obstructed the detention of an undocumented immigrant. Though Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was released on bond after an appearance before a federal magistrate judge, the developments marked a dramatic escalation of the administration’s tactics.
Among the many questions surrounding the unsettling developments was a look to the near future: Was Dugan the first judge to be taken into custody, or the last? It was against this backdrop that NBC News reported:
Asked if the Trump administration would arrest federal judges or Supreme Court justices who do not comply with its immigration agenda, [White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt] said anyone who is “obstructing federal law enforcement from doing their jobs” is at risk of being prosecuted. … “Anyone who is breaking the law or obstructing federal law enforcement officials from doing their jobs is putting ourselves at risk of being prosecuted. Absolutely,” Leavitt said.
Asked specifically whether the administration is prepared to target higher-level judges, the White House press secretary demurred, calling it “a hypothetical question.” Leavitt quickly added, “I defer [sic] you to the Department of Justice for individuals that they are looking at or individual cases.”
That wasn’t a “no.”
Leavitt wasn’t the only one on Donald Trump’s team commenting on the issue. On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi raised eyebrows with some highly provocative rhetoric on Fox News, where the Republican lawyer appeared to threaten judges with prosecutions. As this week got underway, Bondi returned again to Fox News where she referred to Dugan as “a criminal judge sitting on a criminal bench.”
In case this isn’t painfully obvious, the local judge in Milwaukee was charged, but in the United States, defendants enjoy the presumption of innocence. Dugan’s case has not been adjudicated; prosecutors have not presented evidence; and the judge has not had her day in court.
For the nation’s chief law enforcement official to declare — out loud and to a national broadcast audience — that Dugan is “a criminal judge sitting on a criminal bench” is as indefensible as it is plainly unethical.
By all appearances, however, Bondi doesn’t appear to care, which does not bode well as the president and his team intensify their broader offensive against the judiciary.
