QUESTION: Regarding Judge Hannah Dugan’s indictment, some are saying her defence is similar to that of Donald Trump, and this is all political since she says she has absolute immunity. You are the unbiased legal source. One lawyer friend said, “Ask Armstrong, and you will hear the legal truth.” So what’s up with this?
GP
ANSWER: This county state judge of Wisconsin was properly indicted for allegedly obstructing the arrest of a Mexican immigrant by federal US authorities. She has claimed that the charges should be dismissed because she’s immune from prosecution for official acts. Her definition of a “legal act” is that she could kill her spouse and claim immunity.
This is not even remotely related to the allegations of Trump commenting on the election as president. That is within the scope of his position. What he is alleged to have done was not an official act by any stretch of the imagination. She is an activist judge who disagrees with federal law but has no judicial power to circumvent that law. She had no jurisdiction over the ICE issue, which is in a federal court, not a local county court. If I were in the grand jury, I would have indicted her without question. There is no justification whatsoever for her actions, and there is no claim that this is an official act for which she has immunity.
