 WJI policy analyst Alexandria Staubach speaks at a rally outside the Historic Federal Courthouse in Milwaukee on Dec. 15, 2025. Photograph by Jessica Schmidt. Wisconsin Justice Initiative policy analyst Alexandria Staubach spoke about the importance of protecting court proceedings at a Monday rally addressing the multiple consequences of Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence in Wisconsin courthouses. “When a place that is designed to protect you, protect your right to a fair and impartial trial, your right to protection, your right to dignity and equal treatment before the law, becomes a trap to ensnare people seeking justice, we are all less safe,” Staubach said. She added that victims, witnesses, and the accused don’t disappear but “just stay home.” The rally took place just prior to opening statements in Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan’s federal trial on charges of obstructing a federal agency and concealing an individual to prevent arrest. Dugan is accused of assisting an immigrant, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, evade ICE arrest by providing him access to a restricted hallway and directing federal agents away from her courtroom. Dozens of organizers and community members gathered outside the federal courthouse in Milwaukee, braving low digit temperatures to register their discontent with Dugan’s prosecution. Staubach noted in her comments the power of federal prosecutors, including recently appointed Interim U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel. “We’re going to say the quiet part out loud for Brad Schimel,” said Staubach, a former assistant district attorney in Colorado. “Prosecutions are discretionary.” Maxwell Love, the state political and campaign director for the Working Families Party, told WJI the coalition holding the rally was built “so that we could bring the case into the ‘court of public opinion.’” The group seeks “to make sure that the Milwaukee community could engage in a conversation about our values of fairness, due process, and democracy since we couldn’t be present in the courtroom,” Love said. The group highlighted the detrimental impact ICE presence has in the courthouse and its chilling effect on access to justice. “If due process can be violated for one group, it can and will be violated for all,” Wisconsin Working Families Party director Corinne Rosen said. “Today we stand together in this freezing cold to reject fear.” Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director of Voces de la Frontera, discussed the human impact and feelings of insecurity and intimidation created in immigrant community when ICE stands between them and access to justice. Louis Davis, executive director of SEIU Wisconsin led the crowd in chanting, “Your struggle is my struggle.” Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign got the crowd going in yelling, “This is what democracy looks like.” The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that the chants and supportive honking could be heard inside the courthouse. Opening statements for Dugan’s trial began immediately after the rally. Prosecutors leaned heavily on the idea that courthouse arrests are “safe” and “routine,” and that Dugan’s “judicial robe didn’t put her above the law.” Dugan defense attorney Steven Biskupic said that conjecture about a chaotic morning was leading the federal prosecution and that Dugan did not obstruct law enforcement pursuit of Flores-Ruiz. Biskupic said Dugan directed federal law enforcement away from her courtroom in accord with a draft policy previously circulated by Chief Judge Carl Ashley to the Milwaukee County judges, telling them to direct federal agents to their supervisor. Biskupic said Dugan had not yet heard whether or for whom the federal agents had a warrant and so she did not intend to obstruct any action on their warrant. Biskupic also showed a screenshot of a group chat between federal agents, which suggested they had decided, on their own, not to arrest Flores-Ruiz in the courtroom hallway. A video shown during Biskupic’s opening remarks showed federal agents walking behind Flores-Ruiz at a leisurely pace as he exited the sixth floor of the courthouse where Dugan’s courtroom is located. The federal government plans to call up to 28 witnesses in the case and the trial is expected to last around five days.  WJI's Alexandria Staubach speaks at a rally outside the Historic Federal Courthouse in Milwaukee on Dec. 15, 2025. Photograph by Jessica Schmidt.
0 Comments
The U.S. Department of Justice recently expressed concern about the unjust imposition of fines and fees by state and local courts in violation of the civil rights of those accused of crime, quasi-criminal ordinance violations, and civil infractions.
The DOJ stated that the imposition and enforcement of fines and fees on those who cannot afford them may cause escalating debt that “far too often traps individuals and their families in a cycle of poverty and punishment that can be nearly impossible to escape.” The agency pointed to other “profound harm” that fines and fees may cause to those who cannot afford them: incarceration for nonpayment; extension of probation and parole; and loss of a driver’s license, employment, right to vote, or even a home. These negative effects often apply disproportionately to people of color and low-income communities, said the agency. The agency also reminded judges and stakeholders to provide meaningful court access for those with limited English proficiency. The DOJ discussed its concerns about fines and fees in a “Dear Colleague” letter issued April 20 to state and local judges and other justice-system stakeholders. The DOJ reminded judges of several constitutional principles relating to fines and fees, including:
The agency recommended assessment of each individual before imposition of monetary penalties, as “fines and fees will affect individuals differently depending on their resources.” Imposing fines and fees on youth is especially concerning and may be excessive and unreasonable, the DOJ said. Many minors “are too young to legally work, are of compulsory school age or full-time students, have great difficulty obtaining employment due to having a juvenile or criminal record, or simply do not yet have employable skills typically expected of adults.” Judges should presume that youth are unable to pay fines and fees, the DOJ said. The DOJ urged judges and other justice-system stakeholders not to use fines and fees as a means to raise government revenue, divorced from the purpose of punishment. The DOJ pointed to Supreme Court case law indicating that courts “have an affirmative duty to determine an individual’s ability to pay and whether any nonpayment was willful before imposing incarceration as a consequence,” even when a defendant does not raise the issue. State and municipal courts must consider alternatives to incarceration for nonpayment, and should consider alternatives to other serious consequences such as drivers’ license suspensions as well, the DOJ said. As alternatives, the DOJ suggested penalty-free payment plans and amnesty periods during which warrants are canceled or fees waived. The DOJ also suggested alternatives to fines and fees as sentences in the first place. Attendance at a traffic safety class or community service could replace the fines and fees, the DOJ said. The agency recommended that courts and other justice-system officials assess whether their penalties for nonpayment of fines and fees disproportionately affect certain groups. The agency pointed in particular to the suspension of drivers’ licenses for failure to pay, which may disproportionately affect people of color. The DOJ discussed statutory requirements for courts that receive federal funding to provide language assistance for limited English proficient (LEP) individuals regarding imposition and collection of fines and fees. “Such assistance includes, but is not limited to, ensuring that court users with LEP have competent interpreting and translation services during all related hearings, trials, and motions, provided at no cost,” the DOJ wrote. The agency said its Office for Access to Justice would follow up with a guide including best-practice examples from states and municipalities, and its Office of Justice Programs would seek a provider for training assistance for jurisdictions wishing to examine their fines and fees policies and practices. The DOJ defined “fines” as monetary punishments for infractions and “fees” as required payments that go toward activities unrelated to the conviction or punishment. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed