A Constitutional Crisis May Arise From Trump’s Arrest Of Judge Dugan

When federal agents walked to a court hall in Milwoki and later arrested a judge of Wisconsin Hannah Dogan, they crossed a material threshold, but also a constitutional Rubicon heading directly to a constitutional crisis. When doing this, they sent a chilling message that the government’s executive branch now claims the authority to punish judges who stand in the way of his political priorities.

Judge Dogan’s alleged crime? Refusal to allow ICE customers to seize an Eduardo Flores-RUIZ-appeared before her in the state court. According to federal prosecutors, Dogan became “clearly angry” when immigration agents boycotted the court hall to arrest, and allowed the individual to leave through the jury door instead. For this, she was accused of disturbing and hiding a person from arrest.

However, the real obstacle lies in the Trump administration’s attack on constitutional democracy.

Access to justice is not optional

At the heart of the American legal system, a basic guarantee lies: any person inside American, non-citizen, guilty or innocent people-they are entitled to enter the court and search for law to protect without fear of immediate detention. This includes the sacred right of Ybeas Corpus, an old thing that allows a person to challenge illegal detention.

If the executive authority is able to wait at the doors of the court – or worse than that, the storm in the courtrooms itself – is effectively overlooked by this guarantee. Immigrants, witnesses, victims of crime and defendants alike will consider both twice before entering the court. Justice will only be reserved for those who have concession enough to not be afraid of arrest.

The US Supreme Court has constantly realized that unrestricted access to the courts is necessary for constitutional ruling. This right is also protected by the sixth amendment. Employment of this access puts at risk all other rights.

The Trump administration’s decision to target Judge Dogan transforms the court – a traditional reserve of rights – in the law enforcement arm. It turns judges from guardians of freedom into potential conspirators in the penal mechanism of the executive authority. Not only not notaries who are at risk; Every American may one day need to protect the court.

Basic principle: Assumption of innocence

There is an essential basic principle that is exposed to this episode: the assumption of innocence in criminal procedures.

In our legal system, it is assumed that every person enters the courtroom accused of committing an innocent crime until it is proven that he is guilty. This assumption is not just my formation; It is a guarantee. It ensures that no person, imprisonment, or described him as guilty unless the state meets a heavy burden: proving guilt without doubt is reasonable through evidence and a fair listening session.

This standard is decisive protection against arbitrary or political detention.

In the issue raised, Flores-Ruiz appeared in the court as part of a criminal process governed by this principle. He was entitled to be treated as innocent until the judicial process was determined otherwise. In order for Ice agents to soak in the courtroom and try to anticipate this process by arresting him due to civil immigration violations, he spoils this foundational protection. It moves the role of fact -finding in which the courts are constantly assigned to perform.

By interfering with the assumption of innocence and the administration organizing justice, the executive authority not only violated the rights of Florez Rice, but also attacked the constitutional role of the courts themselves.

An open attack on the separation of power

An equal concern is how the arrest of Judge Dogan has undermined the doctrine of the power of power.

The executive authority implements the law while explaining the judiciary and applying it. This division is not just a technique – it is the main structure that prevents tyranny.

Judge Dogan was overseeing criminal procedures for the state, not a migration session. Immigration enforcement is a federal civil process. By trying to overcome its authority in the midst of a criminal session – and then arrest it to resist this overlap – the Trump administration blur the necessary borders between the executive and judicial independence.

If the judges cannot control the courtrooms without fear of personal arrest, the judiciary stops being an independent branch. It becomes just an administrative unit of the executive authority. In such a system, justice is no longer blind; It becomes obedient.

Hypocrisy on “no one is above the law”

US Prosecutor Bam Bondi justified the arrest of Judge Dogan, by declaring social media that “no one is above the law.”

They are noble feelings – however, they get hollow episodes of this administration.

If no one is already above the law, then why did the Trump administration work hard to pardon or excuse or reduce rebellion actions on January 6 – individuals who violently sought to overthrow the constitutional rule? Why is this rebellion celebrated instead of continuous responsibility?

And why, above all, does not seem that this principle applies to former President Trump himself, who is now convicted of 34 criminal crimes, yet they are still acting as if legal accountability does not apply to him? He carries, orders the national agenda, and demands loyalty to his personal cause, so that the convict stands by his peers.

The selective protest of “no one above the law” as a state against the state judge – at the same time excuses the rebellion at one time and the former convicted president – restores the deep political irony that lies behind this claim.

A dangerous precedent with no natural stop point

This is not a story limited to the Immigration Law, or to Wisconsin. It is a dangerous warning about the course of American rule.

Today, he is an uncomfortable immigrant in a local court. Tomorrow can be a protester, a political dissident, or a journalist. If the executive director is allowed to criminalize the decisions of the judicial administration under the curtain of obstruction, the system of checks and the entire balances will collapse.

Indeed, the Trump administration launched an open war on the judiciary. Judges who prevent executive policies are exposed to public defamation. Now, with the arrest of Judge Dogan, the intimidation campaign has moved from words to handcuffs.

This tactic – which is limited to the judges of the decisions of the courtroom – disturbing echoes in other countries where judicial independence was undermined: in Hungarian Victor Urban, in the women of Tayeb Erdogan, and in other places it gives democracy in the executive act.

conclusion

Judge Hana Dogan should not be seen in isolation. It represents a systematic attack on the constitutional system: upon reaching justice, judicial independence, and the principle on which the law must apply equally to everyone.

Whether Judge Dogan violates technically, a federal law will be determined in court. However, the broader constitutional injury – the executive branch that storms the doors of justice itself – has already happened.

The American people should recognize what is at stake. The country in which the judges should be afraid that the executive authority is not a free state; It is an authoritarian state in its cradle. If the United States wants to remain a nation of laws, not from rulers, this attack must be firmly, quickly and without a compromise. Otherwise, we will be drowned in a constitutional crisis with no easy way to go out.