Boston Judge Faces Misconduct Hearing Over Alleged ICE Evasion Incident
By Independent Legal Correspondent
A Massachusetts judge accused of helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest by federal immigration authorities is now facing a formal judicial misconduct hearing, nearly six years after the controversial incident.
Judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph, who serves on the Newton District Court bench, appeared before Suffolk Superior Court in Boston on Monday as proceedings began over civil charges of judicial misconduct. The case stems from a 2018 incident in which Joseph allegedly allowed a defendant—identified as Jose Medina-Perez, a Dominican national—to leave the courthouse through a rear door, bypassing a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer waiting to detain him.
The Original Incident
Medina-Perez was appearing in court on drug possession charges and had an active fugitive warrant from Pennsylvania. He had also previously been deported from the United States on two separate occasions and was barred from reentering the country until at least 2027.
According to court records, an ICE officer was stationed in the courthouse lobby, waiting to take Medina-Perez into custody upon his release. Prosecutors allege that instead of allowing this to happen, Judge Joseph facilitated an alternate exit from the building.
The allegations state that during the court proceedings, Judge Joseph instructed the courtroom clerk to inform the ICE agent that, if released, Medina-Perez would exit through the courtroom’s public door. However, during a brief moment in which the courtroom audio was turned off—reportedly for 52 seconds—Joseph allegedly gave permission for the defendant to be escorted downstairs, where a side exit was used.
Court officer Wesley MacGregor is accused of using his security access to open the rear sally-port door, allowing Medina-Perez, his attorney, and an interpreter to exit the building unnoticed by federal agents.
Legal and Ethical Consequences
Though federal prosecutors originally charged Joseph in 2019 with obstruction of justice and conspiracy, those charges were dropped in September 2022 as part of an agreement in which Joseph admitted to certain facts and referred herself to the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (CJC).
Now, the CJC is leading the formal misconduct case against her. The commission’s complaint accuses Joseph of “willful judicial misconduct” and behavior that is “prejudicial to the administration of justice.” The commission will decide whether disciplinary action should be taken, which could include suspension or removal from the bench.
Judge Denis McInerney is presiding over the misconduct hearing and is expected to issue a detailed report with findings and recommendations following the conclusion of the proceedings.
Arguments from the Defense
At the opening of the hearing, Joseph’s legal team emphasized that she has not been convicted of any crime. Her defense attorney pointed out how the story has taken on a life of its own in local media and public opinion.
“If you were to walk down the street and ask anyone about this case, everyone would say Judge Joseph let an undocumented immigrant out the back door,” her attorney said. “Half would say she should go to jail for it, and the other half would say she’s a hero. But all would agree that she did it.”
The defense argued that the intense media scrutiny and political climate have shaped public perception in ways that ignore legal nuance and the presumption of innocence.
Key Testimony and Evidence
David Jellinek, the defense attorney for Medina-Perez during the 2018 court appearance, testified during cross-examination. According to reports, Jellinek received immunity in exchange for cooperating with the federal investigation into Judge Joseph’s conduct.
Court documents show that when informed an ICE officer was in the building, Joseph allegedly remarked, “That’s fine. I’m not going to allow them to come in here. But he’s been released on this.” Her instructions to turn off the courtroom recording system have also drawn criticism, as it is rare and often questioned when judges suspend court audio.
A Broader Trend?
Joseph’s case is not isolated. During the Trump administration, federal prosecutors brought similar charges against other judges accused of shielding undocumented immigrants from immigration authorities.
In Wisconsin, Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested for allegedly helping a non-citizen evade ICE custody. Likewise, in New Mexico, former Magistrate Judge Joel Cano and his wife, Nancy Cano, faced charges for harboring an undocumented immigrant allegedly affiliated with a gang classified as a terrorist organization.
These cases have sparked fierce debate over the role of the judiciary in federal immigration enforcement, especially as local jurisdictions increasingly adopt sanctuary policies.
Looking Ahead
As the hearing continues, Judge Joseph’s fate now lies with the Massachusetts judicial oversight body. While the federal government chose not to pursue criminal prosecution, the Commission on Judicial Conduct may still recommend serious professional sanctions.
The case has become a flashpoint in the broader national conversation about immigration, the independence of the judiciary, and the tension between state and federal authority.
