A Wisconsin state judge set to stand trial for allegedly hindering an unauthorized immigrant's arrest urged a federal judge Friday to bar Trump administration prosecutors from introducing evidence related to acts alleged in an indictment, arguing that they were all lawful.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, who failed to have the case thrown out on immunity grounds, asserted that specific acts alleged in the concealment and obstruction charges she faces were all performed lawfully and as part of her job as a judge, while federal prosecutors pushed to have their own preferred limits put in place for a trial that's presently set for mid-December.

"Because lawful acts do not and cannot obstruct or hinder under Seventh Circuit cases, the government may not rely on or even introduce evidence of these lawful acts," Dugan said in a motion filed Friday.

Those alleged acts included confronting members of a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement task force and telling them they needed a judicial warrant to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, directing the agents to leave a hallway area and go to a chief judge's office, and then addressing Flores-Ruiz's criminal case off the record, directing him and his attorney to exit through a nonpublic door and advising that he would be able to attend a future hearing remotely, according to court records.

"Judge Dugan moves to exclude all government evidence that she impeded or in any way hindered, within the scope of Counts 1 and 2, the efforts of federal agents to arrest E.F.R. in a state courthouse's public hallways by engaging in the five lawful acts that the indictment lists," she told the court.

Hit with the two-count indictment in May after the April incident, Dugan also urged the judge to revisit her bid to have the case thrown out on judicial immunity grounds. She noted that the government would not necessarily face dismissal of its case due to lack of proof.

"It is possible that it has evidence of other obstructive, hindering or concealing acts that were not part of Judge Dugan's job; not official acts, but unofficial," Dugan said. "If it does, that evidence would remain admissible as to the conduct elements of the two charges, and the government would be left to persuade a jury of the mental elements and the rest."

In their own motion filed Friday, federal prosecutors laid out a number of their own requests for the trial.

According to the government, Dugan should be barred from mentioning potential punishments or consequences that could stem from her conviction, presenting evidence of allegedly "good motives" or "prior good acts," and presenting any evidence or arguments aimed at getting jury members to nullify the case based on their own views of the federal government's immigration policies or enforcement activities.

Prosecutors said they also want to see Dugan barred from presenting evidence about other immigration enforcement actions in the Milwaukee County court or elsewhere, or evidence related to Dugan's arrest.

According to prosecutors, Dugan's defense team has characterized the case as politically charged and an attack on the judiciary's independence in comments after some court hearings, and should not be allowed to make such claims in trial. "Such claims if made in court essentially would allege governmental misconduct, which is not a proper subject for the jury," they said.

In a second filing, Dugan also made more than a dozen motions for the trial. Requests include barring the government from undisclosed expert testimony and requiring it to produce full transcripts of audio recordings and the portions that it intends to introduce and to produce grand jury materials at least two weeks ahead of trial.

Dugan said she also wants to elicit statements the FBI director and attorney general have made to the media and on social media about her alleged actions. "Such statements are admissible as statements made by a party opponent. And such statements are relevant at least because they show bias in the investigation and prosecution," Dugan said.

Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday.

The federal government is represented by Richard G. Frohling, Keith Alexander, Kelly B. Watzka, Timothy W. Funnell and Jonathan H. Koenig of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Dugan is represented by R. Rick Resch, William E. Grau, John H. Bradley and Dean A. Strang of Strang Bradley LLC, Steven M. Biskupic of Steven Biskupic Law Office LLC and Jason D. Luczak and Nicole M. Masnica of Gimbel Reilly Guerin & Brown LLP.

The case is United States v. Hannah C. Dugan, case number 2:25-cr-00089, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.