In November, state court reportBrennan Center for Justice, and Northwestern University Law Overview He hosted a symposium on the state constitution. Several state Supreme Court justices who participated in the program agreed to brief interviews. state court report” is published as a series.
Judge Rebecca Frank Durrett was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2018. Prior to joining the court, he served as a judge on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court for 10 years. She was also the first female presiding judge in Milwaukee County, an assistant district attorney for Milwaukee County, and a special assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
In the interview, Durrett spoke about equal access to justice, challenging the rule of law, and working to get the law right.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
When you were in law school, what did you expect your legal career to be like?
I grew up very involved in temple youth groups. There we learned about the idea of tikkun olam, which in Hebrew basically means repairing the world. So I had a vision of working as a civil servant. That’s what I was always driven to do.
Two experiences shaped the trajectory of my legal career. When I was in high school, there was a mock trial after I “arrested” my teacher, and I ended up being the judge. Before the trial, I was able to sit with the actual judge that day and saw him truly impact the people who came before him. I remember sitting on the bench and seeing the impact and thinking I really wanted to try it. So I went to law school.
I interned at the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office during the summer between my sophomore and junior years, where I observed prosecutors at work and witnessed their ability to fight for justice not only for individuals but for the community. They worked to ensure that people were properly prosecuted and that victims were protected. And they sought to end the cycle of recidivism. That was shocking to me too.
What advice do you wish you had received as a law student?
I wish I had been told to take a breath. you will understand it. Even if you know what point B is, it can be difficult to know how to get from point A to point B. I remember being a prosecutor with three young children and wondering how I was going to run for judge.
What worked for me was to focus on doing the next right thing and doing it well. Because of that, I was able to become the first female presiding judge in Milwaukee County. And when a seat opened up on our county circuit, I ran for it and did the job very well. I then looked to the state Supreme Court, didn’t like the direction it was taking, and decided to challenge the incumbent court.
How are the challenges facing law students different from those you have experienced?
I think the big challenge today is that we can’t believe that government will function the same way it always has. It shows that precedent is not respected. It shows that the separation of powers is not respected. Historically, the development of law has been a slow process. I think that’s a good thing. When courts have overturned precedent in the past, they have done so slowly, deliberately, and clearly so that everyone can understand. And now the court is being held by the highest-ranking civil servants. We are calling on the public not to respect the court’s decision.
I think the next generation really has to fight for democracy. They will have to fight to ensure that the Constitution is respected and that the separation of powers is maintained. But I think they’re up for the challenge.
What is the most memorable opinion you have attended?
We recently published some opinions that have obviously gotten a lot of attention and are getting a lot of attention. One of these is a lawsuit to overturn an 1849 law banning abortion. The argument there was that the law had been enacted once. Roe vs. Wade It was turned over (at Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organizationthe U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there was no federal constitutional right to abortion). We repealed that law because we determined that since then there have been so many laws and comprehensive regulations regarding abortion that they are essentially invalid. The other was a redistricting case in which a state legislative map was torn down on the grounds that it was unconstitutional.
These cases were in our hands because the U.S. Supreme Court had pushed the abortion issue to the states. Roe vs. Wade was overturned, ruling that the redistricting lawsuit was not warranted under federal law ( Lucho vs. Common Cause).
What do you enjoy about being a state court judge?
For me, it’s definitely about public service. I speak for all of my colleagues when I say that we are all committed to upholding the rule of law and ensuring clarity in the law. I think this is important for everyone. It’s a lot of responsibility. I am very concerned about my condition. I care about people, resources and community. And I’m honored, and all of us are, to be able to serve and decide the laws of Wisconsin. We are working hard every day to ensure that this happens.
What are some of the challenges facing state courts?
A major challenge facing state courts is access to justice. A recent report by the Legal Services Corporation shows that 92% of people with civil legal claims have their claims never or satisfactorily resolved.
There is a shortage of lawyers. Funding is being cut from the few places that serve poor people who cannot afford lawyers. And safety nets are being cut, which will make people’s need for access to lawyers even greater. We’re talking about essential cases, housing and children, domestic violence restraining orders, and the ability to receive benefits. These affect not only the people involved in the incident, but also the community as a whole. I believe that access to justice is an important cornerstone of democracy, and that we all need to work hard to ensure that people are represented on these important life issues.
We are working on solutions in Wisconsin, and I know other states are as well. We were able to increase the number of pro bono lawyers. But there still aren’t enough lawyers, so the state is currently considering proposals that other states have tried, such as using community justice workers.
And there’s a lot going on in the shadow cases of the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s actually an emergency document, but the order doesn’t say who cited it, who’s on which side, and there’s no clear basis for it. This is also harmful to the law because we don’t know how the law is developed. I don’t know why precedent is sometimes overturned, but it’s difficult. Because credibility, clarity, and transparency of the law are all what this court strives for.
What do you say to those who say the courts are too politicized?
Just because we sometimes have deep disagreements in our opinions and opposing opinions does not mean we don’t get along or that we are divided along political lines. Despite how we are sometimes portrayed in the media, our courts are highly collegial. We spend time together and leave our differences alone.
As for the cases themselves, I looked at the statistics from last year and found that only 18% of cases were decided 4-3. There is a widespread misconception that we are fundamentally divided, when in fact we each care about the law. These are difficult cases. It is our responsibility to address these issues. We will do our best to determine them.
I think that courts, especially now, are being asked to do that job. That’s a challenge, and I think we need to strive to make sure that our courts uphold the rule of law and are a traditional check on abuse of power.
What is something people might not know about your state constitution?
Our Constitution is one of the oldest outside the New England region, dating back to 1848. But the Constitution we have now is not the first one proposed to voters. A constitutional convention was held in 1847, but voters deemed the original constitution too progressive and repealed it. There were at least two things that made this bill too progressive in the eyes of most voters. One is to give property rights to married women, and the other is to allow black suffrage in a referendum. Wisconsin wanted to join the union and become a state, but that wasn’t possible until the Constitution was written, so those things had to be taken away.
What do you wish more people understood about state courts and the Constitution?
State constitutions are where people’s values and interests are reflected, in part because they are much easier to amend than the federal constitution. We believe this is the best place for litigants to support the claims brought before us. And I hope they do it more regularly so we can develop stronger state constitutional case law.
Gabriela Sanchez is a staff writer and editor at the Brennan Center for Justice.
Recommended citation: Gabriela Sanchez Conversation with Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Frank DurrettSᴛᴀᴛᴇ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ Rᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (January 27, 2026), https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/conversation-wisconsin-supreme-court-justice-rebecca-frank-dallet
