XPost: talk.politics.guns, talk.politics.misc, soc.culture.israel

https://ethicsalarms.com/2025/05/12/ethics-dunces-more-than-150-former-state-and-federal-judges/


Ethics Dunces: “More Than 150 Former State and Federal Judges”
May 12, 2025 / Jack Marshall


One aspect of the legal community that has become (disturbingly) clear
to me since I entered the weird field of legal ethics full time about 25
years ago is that judges stick together even when it is obviously
unethical to do so. I don’t know why this is so—lawyers certainly don’t have this proclivity—but it doesn’t matter why judges close ranks and circle their metaphorical wagons any time one of them is being held
accountable for unethical conduct. It matters that it is unethical, and
they know it. But in these situations they are like cops erecting the
“blue line.”

I have written about the case of a lawyer in Seattle, Washington whose
client revealed to him that a state judge was accepting bribes. The
lawyer felt it was his duty to report the judge to authorities
(especially after the judge ruled against another client after one such
bribe), and indeed the judge, who was corrupt, ended up being removed
from the bench and prosecuted. But the colleagues of that judge made
sure that the lawyer was disbarred, because the evidence he had acted
upon was a client confidence. The message sent by the action, however,
was clear: don’t mess with judges, even the crooked ones.

I recalled that ugly episode when I read that “More than 150 former
state and federal judges have signed a letter to Pam Bondi, the attorney general, condemning the Trump administration’s escalating battles with
the judiciary and calling the recent arrest of a sitting state court
judge in Milwaukee an attempt to intimidate.” That was the Times
version; most news sources just emphasized the last part: How dare the
Trump administration arrest a judge?


Before I read the letter, I assumed that the 150 former jurists had
found an aspect of the allegations against the judge questionable or unconvincing. This interested me, because the accounts I have read
seemed pretty definitive: the judge, Hannah C. Dugan of the Milwaukee
County Circuit Court aided and abetted an illegal immigrant’s escape
from ICE agents by directing him to leave through a side door in her
courtroom while the agents waited to arrest him. Dugan was eventually
arrested by the FBI last month for obstructing immigration law
enforcement. If the ex-judges were accusing President Trump of
intimidation tactics, there must have been something wrong with the
arrest, right?

Wrong. The letter doesn’t bother to deny that the judge did what she is accused of, which is mind-blowing conduct for any law enforcement
official and particularly a judge. Nah...what the 150 plus find worthy
of protest are “the circumstances of Judge Dugan’s arrest which took
place seven days after the alleged offense.” Behold…

There was no emergency whatsoever; the administration could have easily
issued a summons for Judge Dugan to appear before a court, as they would
have done in other white collar cases. There is not an ounce of doubt
that Judge Dugan would have appeared in court in response to a summons. Instead, the United States Department of Justice at your direction
decided to create an embarrassing spectacle that included the FBI’s
arrest and handcuffing of Judge Dugan and the Director of the FBI, Kash
Patel, posting a photo of the perp walk on X. As you know well, the Confidentiality and Media Contacts Policy that appears on the Justice Department’s website directs that DOJ personnel “should not voluntarily disclose a photograph of a defendant unless it serves a law enforcement function or unless the photograph is already part of the public record
in the case.”

The circumstances of Judge Dugan’s arrest make it clear that it was
nothing but an effort to threaten and intimidate the state and federal judiciaries into submitting to the Administration, instead of
interpreting the Constitution and laws of the United States. This
cynical effort undermines the rule of law and destroys the trust the
American people have in the nation’s judges to administer justice in the courtrooms and in the halls of justice across the land.

The letter than slips into over-the-top rhetoric about how brave judges
(like them) will not be intimidated by the “Trump Administration’s
assault on the judiciary, the Rule of Law and those who administer it, including Judge Dugan.”

Wow. The letter, far from making a case for the Trump administration and
the President himself showing insufficient respect and fealty to the
judiciary, demonstrates vividly how politicized, untrustworthy and
unethical an unacceptable number of judges have become.

Before protesting the arrest of Judge Dugan, the letter reveals the signatories’ horror at Attorney General Bondi referring to politically-motivated judges as “deranged.” Gee, what’s the appropriate adjective for a judge who assists a fugitive from justice in escaping
law enforcement by sneaking him out of her courtroom? I think “deranged”
is fair, perhaps even restrained.

The letter signed by these judges is also deranged. Dugan’s arrest was “nothing but an effort to threaten and intimidate the state and federal judiciaries into submitting to the Administration”? It was an absolutely appropriate response to a judge, who, like any other citizen, is bound
to obey the law, assisting a law-breaker in avoiding law enforcement.
The actions of the FBI in arresting a law-breaking judge “undermines the
rule of law and destroys the trust the American people have in the
nation’s judges to administer justice in the courtrooms and in the halls
of justice across the land”? Seriously? AHAHAHAHAHA…<big breath>…HAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s hilarious,tell me another! What undermines
the rule of law and the trust of the American People is judges like
Dugan breaking the law and expecting to be applauded for it.

Awww, the signatories are upset that the FBI made the criminal judge do
a perp walk in front of cameras? Too bleeping bad. In the same section
that the ex-judges whine about the judiciary being called deranged, they
object to Bondi saying that “[the Administration is] sending a very
strong message” and that “we will come after you and we will prosecute you.” Wait…aren’t these the same people who have been bleating about how “nobody is above the law”? Nobody but judges, apparently. Got it.

What sends the message that no one is above the law more clearly than a
judge who deliberately foiled law enforcement being perp-walked in front
of cameras? In the letter, the jurists write to Bondi “As you know well,
the Confidentiality and Media Contacts Policy that appears on the
Justice Department’s website directs that DOJ personnel “should not voluntarily disclose a photograph of a defendant unless it serves a law enforcement function or unless the photograph is already part of the
public record in the case.”

This spectacle obviously served a law enforcement function by alerting
any other judges inclined to give “sanctuary” to illegals that they will
be similarly treated—as they should be.

I’d be interested in knowing if any of those signing the letter
expressed similar objections when armed FBI agents raided Donald Trump’s
home at dawn rather than issuing a summons. But then, Trump wasn’t a judge.

Never mind.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)