[QuercusMax]

I don't think it implies the judge did anything wrong. If you're arrested, you're going to experience whatever the cops want to do to you, regardless of whether they can convict you of it.

"You can beat the rap but not the ride" is an indictment of the cops, not the arrestee.

[prepend]

I don’t know. It seems pretty unusual.

Imagine that someone is being charged with shoplifting and literally at trial. Some other law enforcement agency shows up to the trial and wants to arrest them for jaywalking.

It seems dysfunctional that the court would release them when they know a different law enforcement agency is literally in the building and wanting to arrest them.

Is this how it works when the FBI comes to a county court looking for someone the county cops have in custody?

[epistasis]

Talk to the cops, not the judge who is in a proceeding? Go talk to the chief justice?

The idea that the judge did anything wrong here, based on the description given by the FBI themselves, is absolutely beyond the pale. There's zero reason for ICE agents to barge into court and demand to take somebody.

They didn't even leave one of the multiple agents in the courtroom to wait for the proceedings to end. To blame the judge at all in this requires making multiple logical and factual jumps that even the FBI did not put forward.

Edit: the Trump administration has also been attacking the Catholic Charities of Milwaukee, which this judge used to run:

> Before she was a judge, Dugan worked as a poverty attorney and executive director of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee.

It seems pretty clear that this is a highly politically motivated arrest that has zero justification.

[b112]

This reminds me of those cops arresting that nurse, over their attempts to illegally have blood drawn from an unconscious person.

[rolph]

LEO should have no say whatsoever regarding any medical proceedure.

any one who keeps a hippocratic oath should not be performing procedures because they were "commanded" to, under pain of professional discreditation.

[prepend]

Oh, I’m certainly not endorsing the arrest of the judge.

But wouldn’t the bailiff hold the person?

Is it typical for the FBI to lose a suspect in this manner? If so, this seems dysfunctional as if someone is in the court system then jurisdictions need to coordinate to just operate efficiently. It needs fixing so if ICE wants someone and a local courthouse has them in custody that ICE can pick them up.

But arresting judging is not going to help fix this bureaucratic silliness.

[epistasis]

On what grounds would the bailiff hold the person?

I'm not sure why the courthouse should hold someone for ICE, it wasn't even necessary here they still got the person. All they had to do was stay where they were.

[prepend]

That theres a federal warrant for his detention.

I don't think this would be to hold them indefinitely. Just that they would have the suspect sit there and wait for the agents to return.

[epistasis]

What federal warrant was there? I don't see any mention of one but the best that ICE could issue is not a judicial warrant and does not meet most of the requirements under the 4th amendment for detainment of a person.

[nradov]

Generally state and local law enforcement and courts have no legal requirement to enforce most federal arrest warrants. This is due to our dual sovereignty system. Of course they also can't actively interfere with federal law enforcement or lie to federal officers, but it doesn't seem like that's what happened in this incident.

[ClumsyPilot]

No one is obligated to do ICE’s dirty work for them. Even most totalitarian countries don’t go that far.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

> local courthouse has them in custody

I think this is the disconnect you're seeing. He was not in custody: he was appearing before a judge.

[prepend]

Oh, thanks. I assumed he was appearing before the judge as a defendant and was in custody.