A Wisconsin circuit court judge is drawing attention after declaring she may refuse to continue holding court sessions following the recent arrest of fellow judge Hannah Dugan by federal authorities.Judge Monica Isham of Sawyer County expressed her concerns in an email sent to judges throughout the state, titled “Guidance Requested or I Refuse to Hold Court,” where she asked for clarification and support from judicial leadership following the controversial arrest.In the message, Isham cited safety concerns for herself, her staff, and the integrity of court operations. “If there is no guidance for us and no support for us, I will refuse to hold court in Branch 2 in Sawyer County,” she wrote. “I will not put myself or my staff who may feel compelled to help me or my community in harm’s way.”
Judge Isham also raised constitutional concerns, referencing both state and federal constitutional rights related to due process. “I have no intention of allowing anyone to be taken out of my courtroom by ICE… especially without due process,” she stated.
The situation follows the arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan on charges related to an alleged effort to prevent the arrest of a noncitizen by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Federal officials claim that after a court hearing on April 18, Judge Dugan helped a defendant—identified as Eduardo Flores-Ruiz—avoid immigration authorities by escorting him through a non-public exit.
Flores-Ruiz, who is reportedly in the country without legal documentation, was in court facing three misdemeanor battery charges. According to a criminal complaint, Judge Dugan directed officers to leave the courtroom and then personally helped the defendant and his attorney exit through a secured area, bypassing ICE agents who were waiting in the public lobby.
Dugan now faces charges of obstruction of an official proceeding and concealing an individual to prevent arrest.
In light of these developments, Judge Isham’s message highlights the growing concern among some state judicial officers over how federal immigration actions intersect with courtroom procedures and judicial responsibilities.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice has not released an official statement regarding Judge Isham’s remarks, but the topic is stirring debate about how local courts should handle situations involving immigration enforcement.
Meanwhile, civil rights attorneys and court staff are awaiting further instructions or clarification from judicial leadership as legal professionals navigate the balance between public safety, legal obligations, and courtroom independence.
As of now, Judge Isham has not officially paused court proceedings, but her email underscores rising tension over the role local courts play in immigration-related arrests and the broader legal process.
