On Sunday's episode of ABC's "This Week," former New Jersey governor Chris Christie (R) speculated on the now-infamous Judge Hannah Dugan.

Dugan is facing obstruction and concealment charges, and according to Chrrisite, could benefit from the Supreme Court's decision that a president is immune from prosecution when executing the essential responsibilities of the office, as Breitbart News reported.

The judge was arrested with no small amount of fanfare late last week after a federal agent claimed that she distracted officials and ushered an illegal alien out a back door, as Breitbart News reported.

The criminal in question was apprehended quickly by agents on scene, but the judge was arrested on several counts for her actions in the matter.

From the interview

Host Martha Raddatz said during the interview with the former governor, “Let’s talk about Wisconsin and what happened in that courtroom. You’re a former prosecutor, would you have brought charges against that judge?”

Christie said, “Well, I’ll tell you, Martha, this is one of those situations where everybody, I think, is acting badly."

"So, first off, you know, I don’t know what this judge was thinking in terms of trying to help a criminal defendant try to avoid an arrest warrant from federal authorities, and, you know, it’s not a typical judicial action in my experience, not something a judge would normally do," he said.

The Other Side

Christie wasn't looking to just represent one side, though, and went on to talk about the possible flip side for the judge during his interview:

"On the other side, when you really read through this, I don’t know that the complaint, the indictment that was filed, is completely consistent with the affidavit that was filed because, you know, this guy did wind up in a public courtroom near public elevators after he left the courtroom and was seen by one of the agents who was there to assist in the apprehension," he went on.

"So whether or not the way they’re characterizing these facts are completely accurate is something we’re going to have to see when we get to a trial in this case," he concluded.

Former Department of Justice spokesperson Sarah Isgur also weighed in on the judge's conduct, speaking to how rare it is that this kind of issue comes up for judicial consideration:

“They have a problem because she is a judge. Now no court has found that judges are immune from criminal prosecution, but that Trump immunity decision that we talked about last year could be very relevant here whether they can even bring criminal charges against a judge who was in her own courtroom potentially doing something that could be seen as a, quote, judicial act," she said.

Christie responded, saying, “The Trump immunity decision for this administration may giveth and taketh away here because, you know, giving that kind of broad immunity to the president, you can be sure that the judge’s lawyers will be arguing a judge is entitled to similar immunity.”