Here’s a shocking truth: Former Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, convicted of a felony for obstructing federal immigration agents, will still receive her state pension. But here’s where it gets controversial—despite her resignation amid impeachment threats and a criminal conviction, Wisconsin law shields her earned pension benefits. How can this be? Let’s break it down.
On January 3, 2026, Judge Dugan stepped down from the bench as state Republicans were gearing up to impeach her. Her resignation came after a federal jury found her guilty of obstructing federal agents attempting to make an immigration arrest outside her courtroom—a felony charge. Yet, Wisconsin state law generally protects pension benefits, even for individuals facing criminal charges. And this is the part most people miss—the law views pensions as earned benefits tied to contributions and eligibility, not as privileges that can be revoked due to misconduct.
Mark Lamkins, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds, confirmed that pensions are typically safe from forfeiture unless a very specific exception applies. This exception, stemming from a 2019 law, allows the state to withhold pension funds only if a court orders restitution in cases of felony theft or misconduct in public office, where the crime caused financial loss to the employer. Dugan’s case doesn’t meet these criteria, so her pension remains intact.
Here’s the twist: While Dugan’s resignation might seem strategically timed, her pension calculations are based on fiscal years (July 1 to June 30), not calendar years. So, resigning in January 2026 instead of December 2025 has no significant impact on her pension payments. Dugan’s legal team is appealing her conviction, and given that she’s a first-time offender charged with a non-violent crime, prison time is unlikely.
In her resignation letter to Governor Tony Evers, Dugan stated that citizens deserved a fresh start with a new judge rather than enduring a ‘partisan fight in the state legislature.’ Now, it’s up to Governor Evers to appoint a replacement, who must then win a full six-year term in the following spring election.
But here’s the question that sparks debate: Should public officials convicted of felonies retain their pensions? While Wisconsin law is clear, the moral and ethical implications are far from settled. What do you think? Should pensions be protected regardless of criminal convictions, or should there be stricter accountability for public servants? Let’s discuss in the comments!
