Supporters of Judge Hannah Dugan protest outside the United States Federal Building and Courthouse in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on Thursday, May 15, 2025 ahead of Dugan's arraignment. (AP/Todd Richmond)
Some fear this continued political bias could risk his impartiality in presiding over Dugan's trial — or at least the perceptions of it, in the eyes of Trump allies. Adelman did not respond to a request for comment.
In 2020, Adelman published an article for Harvard Law & Policy Review, titled, "The Roberts Court’s Assault on Democracy" that set off a torrent of criticism from Trump allies and court commentators alike.
The article accused Chief Justice John Roberts of breaking with his Senate confirmation testimony in 2005 — instead ushering in a "hard-right majority" on the Supreme Court, and "actively participating in undermining American democracy."
Adelman also took aim at Trump, whose temperament he said "is that of an autocrat," but who he said "is also disinclined to buck the wealthy individuals and corporations who control his party."
Adelman used the article to advocate for "righting the ship" of the high court, in part by embracing an approach similar to the Warren Court — known both for its landmark civil rights rulings and a slew of other progressive decisions.
100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND 'TEFLON DON': TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT
U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem testifies before a House Homeland Security hearing on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) budget, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 14, 2025. (REUTERS/Anna Rose Layden)
Dugan's trial comes at a time when Trump and his allies have blasted so-called "activist" judges who they see as acting politically to block his agenda — suggesting her trial, and Adelman's behavior — will be under especially close scrutiny.
But others noted that federal judges often take great caution to avoid the appearance of political bias, even more so in public remarks, understanding that doing so could violate the canons for judicial behavior.
Many also see their roles on the court as a serious job that requires them to be impartial arbiters of the law — looking to precedent, rather than politics — as their guide.
In presiding over Dugan's case, experts hope Adelman will do the same.
"When I have served on panels with sitting federal judges, they often balk at even discussing the scope of constitutional rights out of concern for these canons," Turley noted in the an op-ed. "Federal judges are expected to speak through opinions in court decisions rather than in editorials or law review articles."
Breanne Deppisch is a national politics reporter for Fox News Digital covering the Trump administration, with a focus on the Justice Department, FBI, and other national news.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-judge-history-anti-trump-remarks-assigned-hannah-dugan-criminal-case