The day after a jury voted to convict Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan on a felony charge, top Wisconsin Republicans called for her to resign, citing the state constitution.
In a joint statement, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and Majority Leader Tyler August, R-Walworth, said Dugan’s “privilege of serving the people of Wisconsin has come to an end.” Vos and August said that if she does not resign “immediately,” they’ll move to impeach her.
They pointed to a section of the Wisconsin Constitution that states no person convicted of a felony “shall be eligible to any office of trust, profit or honor in this state unless pardoned of the conviction.”
News with a little more humanity
WPR’s “Wisconsin Today” newsletter keeps you connected to the state you love without feeling overwhelmed. No paywall. No agenda. No corporate filter.
Dugan was convicted of obstructing an immigration arrest Thursday night, after a four-day trial that garnered national attention. Many saw it as a glimpse into how local courts intersect with the administration’s crackdown on immigrants.
The charges stemmed from an incident on April 18, when federal immigration authorities attempted to arrest a man who was appearing before Dugan in Milwaukee Circuit Court on battery charges. Dugan sent the officers elsewhere before letting the defendant out a side door, saying they would resume the hearing later and virtually. The man was arrested by immigration agents outside.
In their statement, Vos and August said the conviction of Dugan triggers an immediate vacancy on the bench, citing a 1976 opinion authored by Democratic Attorney General Bronson La Follette regarding a state senator.
“Such is the case here, and Judge Dugan must recognize that the law requires her resignation,” Vos and August wrote.
But Howard Schweber, a legal expert and professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, says it’s not clear that anything needs to happen immediately, because the Dugan case is almost certain to be appealed.
“One question is whether any action of this kind is appropriate prior to the point where those appeals are exhausted,” he said.
After the jury decision came down Thursday, Dugan’s legal team said at a press conference: “The case is a long way from over.”
Dugan’s attorneys did not immediately respond to WPR’s request for comment.
If the conviction is upheld, Schweber said, stepping down from the bench would be warranted.
“It would seem to be appropriate as a normative and political matter to wait and see how the appeals come out,” he added.
In the meantime, Dugan has been suspended from the bench since after her arrest in late April. In a statement, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Supreme Court said that suspension is still in effect.
“The Court is further aware that in the federal criminal case, a judgment has not yet been entered and that proceedings in that case are ongoing,” the statement further reads. “The Court will continue to monitor those proceedings and will respect the federal judicial process.”
Pending appeals, Dugan faces sentencing at a date that has not yet been specified. The charge for which she was convicted could carry up to five years in prison.
Political valence over a legal proceeding
The case against Dugan was among the highest-profile demonstrations of how President Donald Trump’s administration is proceeding against people it views as standing in the way of its immigration enforcement priorities.
After the jury decision, interim U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel disputed the political import of the case.
“It is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day in a public courthouse,” he said.
But Trump officials heralded the outcome as a victory on social media. Deputy U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the jury decision sends a message to criminals — “even those who wear robes.”
Schweber said that political context shows the Trump administration may view this outcome as a signal to target other judges who “get in the way of the Trump administration’s mass deportation policies.”
“But the fact that that political context exists does not invalidate the basic legal proposition,” he added.
Following Dugan’s conviction, Milwaukee activist groups expressed support for the judge. The immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera issued a statement saying it has been following other instances of people being arrested in Milwaukee and Waukesha courthouses.
During Dugan’s trial, prosecutors argued that immigration authorities pursue arrests inside of courthouses for safety reasons. People arriving to court, they argued, go through security screenings.
Under former President Joe Biden’s administration, immigration enforcement was discouraged at courthouses. Homeland Security officials at that time argued that targeting courthouses would deter cooperation with law enforcement.
Wisconsin Public Radio, © Copyright 2025, Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System and Wisconsin Educational Communications Board.
