Vigilante Judges – Defying the Law

Never did I think, as a former U.S. Court of Appeals clerk, I would witness an uprising – the brazen subversion of established laws – by judges at multiple levels in America. But here we are. In legal terms, self-appointed lawbreakers enforcing laws are “vigilantes.” We now have vigilante judges.

Last week, in Wisconsin, a county circuit court judge, Hannah Dugan, “secreted” in her chambers and aided the escape of a Mexican illegal alien, formerly deported, facing assault charges, while ICE, DEA, CBP, and the FBI agents waited outside her chambers to deport him again.

Judge Dugan, without any claim to anything, was properly arrested for obstructing justice. Judges are not police officers, not authorized to help criminals escape, and not – whatever goes on inside their heads – empowered to become a modern “freedom train” for criminals they like or favor.

Nor are judges at any level empowered to assume the duties of another branch of government, no matter what their emotional, political, or anti-executive temperament or prejudice. Beyond individual crimes involved in such activity, it brazenly violates separation of powers.

Now, we have a second Wisconsin county circuit judge, Monica Isham, who has decided to join the vigilante judge movement, asserting a right to close down her chambers or boycott the arrest of her fellow judge for acts of criminal activism, setting aside her oath to impartially adjudicate.

Obviously, both judges should be disciplined for acts that, at the federal level, are impeachable and in Wisconsin’s own Constitution, Article 7, Sections 1, 11, and 13, are behaviors that appear to warrant removal “for cause” by the Supreme Court or by “Address” by their legislature.

That evolution aside, this movement – vigilante judges, or judges deciding to take the law into their own hands – is not limited to Wisconsin.

In New Mexico, a former county judge, Jose Louis Cano, has been arrested for destroying evidence, including photographs and using a hammer to destroy video technology unfavorable to illegal aliens part of Venezuela’s violent Tren d Argua gang, and is facing charges. They lived on his property.

Widening the aperture, or zooming out, this vigilante judge movement is not limited to state or county level judges. In a different form, the overwhelmingly Obama and Biden judges tossing, stopping, enjoining, and maligning Trump Administration law enforcement, including deportation proceedings, are acting out with the same vigilante – or activist – intent.

Judge Boasberg is fast becoming the posterchild for bad judicial behavior at the federal level, first demanding a plane with hundreds of proven criminals – by their own admission, past convictions in the U.S. and El Salvador, admitted membership in a foreign terrorist organization (MS-13), or prior deportation, be “turned around” and all the violent criminals be reimported into the U.S..

Then, in an embarrassingly emotional rant, perhaps animated by his family’s work to assist illegal aliens, he insisted proven facts were unproven, bad faith was at work, that his politics were not why he despised the positions of the Justice Department, and began contempt proceedings against the administration when they refused to reimport the deported criminal terrorists.

Across the federal judiciary, more than 100 cases are being heard by Obama and Biden judges, transparently and cynically selected (so-called “forum shopping”) by leftist, liberal, or anti-Trump plaintiffs, and these judges assert powers and nationwide jurisdiction they simply do not have.

Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or any statute passed since that time gives any federal district judge – or circuit judge for that matter – the power to assert nationwide jurisdiction after hearing a case or controversy in their district. Nor can they lawfully base decisions on personal emotion, politics, or antipathy for a president, attorney general, or administration of the opposing party.

So, where does all this leave us? In an awful pickle. We live in an era of rising vigilantism by left-leaning activists on the bench, frustrated that elections have not vindicated their politics, willing to abandon their judicial oath, temperament, and practices for venal political ends or spleen venting.

Bottom line: Judges at any level who knowingly, egregiously, for whatever political reason violate their duties, become derelict, brazenly hostile to fair administration of justice, should face the music.

If they violate their oath, they should be removed. If they violate long established laws which apply to other citizens, they should be arrested. Our Founding Fathers would never condone, and made no provision for, vigilante judges.

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC. Robert Charles has also just released an uplifting new book, “Cherish America: Stories of Courage, Character, and Kindness” (Tower Publishing, 2024).