”Evers’ judges” is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers’ appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees’ own judgeship applications.
Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is. Asterisks indicate paragraphs deleted due to length of the answer.
Name: Tanner Brook Kilander
Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court
Appointment date: Feb. 27, 2026, to term ending July 31, 2027
Education:
Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Undergraduate – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
High School – Troy High, Troy, Idaho
Recent legal employment:
January 2016-present – Children’s Court intake attorney and SPD private bar, Kilander Legal Services, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
June 2011-December 2015 – Assistant state public defender, Milwaukee Juvenile Division, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin
January 2007-June 2011 – Children’s Court intake attorney and SPD private bar, Kilander Legal Services, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
May 2002-January 2007 – Kilander Legal Services, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Bar and administrative memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
General character of practice:
The nature of my practice long predates my law degree. When I was in 5th grade, my best friend didn’t show up at school on a random Tuesday, and I never saw her again until we were nearly thirty. I didn’t know it at the time, but she had been placed in foster care and would never return to her family or to our school. She lost everything – her family, her friends, her dog. This loss impacted me forever.
Once I learned more about the child welfare system, I knew that I wanted to be a social worker. To help kids who were in unsafe situations, but also to help their families stay together so they didn’t have to lose everyone they love the way my best friend had. When I got my degree in 1997, I immediately became a child protective services social worker. The two years I spent in that role taught me so much about humanity … and it taught me that I loved the courtroom. As a social worker, I had all the responsibility to keep children safe, but very little power to advocate for what my families needed. I watched the lawyers file motions and argue in court to help my families, and I knew that’s what I wanted to do. I left social work to attend law school in 1999, with my heart set on returning to Children’s Court to represent parents in CHIPS cases.
After several years managing the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic (see Question 32), I applied for and got the position I had always wanted – I secured a spot on the “Intake List” at the Vel Phillips Youth and Family Justice Center, commonly referred to as “Children’s Court.” This is a closed list of 35 attorneys, and we represent all of the parents in Milwaukee County whose children are taken away by Child Protective Services. I’ve been defending parents in CHIPS cases for a combined total of fifteen years, first from 2007 through 2011, and then resuming in 2016. During this time frame, I have also taken occasional cases as a guardian ad litem for children in CHIPS and guardianship matters. All of those cases are court appointments.
In May of 2011, I went to work at the Wisconsin State Public Defender’s Office as an Assistant State Public Defender. From 2011-2015, I worked as a staff attorney at the Milwaukee Juvenile office. There, I represented parents in Termination of Parental Rights cases at Children’s Court, as well as youth in delinquency and CHIPS cases. I loved the delinquency work, this was an area I had not explored before, and remains an important part of my practice today.
I returned to private practice January 1, 2016, reopening my solo practice, Kilander Legal Services. For nearly ten years, I have remained on the Intake List, and have continued to accept appointments from the State Public Defender for CHIPS youth, TPR parents, and youth in delinquency cases. Since 2022, I have also been representing children charged with homicide cases. Although my clients are children – as young as ten years old – they are charged as adults, and these cases are litigated in criminal court. Aside from one Lincoln County matter I am currently involved in, the entirety of my practice is in Milwaukee County.
I have a high volume practice with frequent litigation. Though I am in court day in and day out, I have relatively limited experience with jury trials. (I believe I’ve had 7 juries reach verdict – 2 CHIPS and 5 TPR.) Most Children’s Court cases don’t have a jury right, and clients often waive jury in CHIPS cases so as to avoid lengthy delays. I frequently have court trials in CHIPS matters, averaging 2-3 per year for a total of approximately 25 in the past decade. Creative motions and out-of-court advocacy tend to be more effective tools to assist my clients in getting their children back quickly, and I take pride in my problem solving and hands-on approach. An effective CHIPS defense practice requires more than just litigation – it requires knowledge about the administrative codes governing DMCPS, the policies and standards CPS workers are supposed to follow, and a willingness to “remind” them through the use of team meetings and contempt motions when they have deviated from their required standards.
In 2024, I added a new aspect to my CHIPS defense practice – a holistic defense team. I contract with several social workers (titled “Client Services Specialists,” or “CSS”) and paralegals to provide a more holistic approach to my child welfare and delinquency cases. My Client Services Specialists assist clients with the seemingly little things that become big barriers to getting their kids returned … help navigating public transportation, public benefits, medical and educational advocacy, and sometimes just having someone to sit with them when they are meeting with a CPS worker. My CSS team assists my clients with the out-of-court things that I wish I had time to do. This has proven to be an incredibly effective approach – my clients’ children are returning home faster and with less in-court litigation, staying home successfully, and ending their involvement with CPS with lasting tools to prevent future system involvement. I was the first person on our Intake List to implement a holistic approach, and other lawyers are now contracting with our workers as well, with similar results.
In addition to my CHIPS defense work, nearly half of my current practice is defending children charged with delinquencies or adult offenses. I am one of a handful of Milwaukee County private bar lawyers certified to take high level felony delinquencies, as well as high level adult felonies. I currently represent three children charged as adults with homicide matters – two with first degree intentional homicides, one with first degree reckless homicide. I have delinquency trials regularly, and have a homicide jury trial coming up in February. I’ve litigated three reverse waivers in the past three years, and litigate waiver hearings on a regular basis. I have a high success rate in the delinquency trials and waivers.
***
Finally, in addition to all of the above, I do make the time to provide pro bono assistance to people who need help. So far this year, I have represented a relative caregiver in a licensing denial, filed a name change for a trans youth that I coach at Beckum Stapleton, and assisted a former caregiver to appeal a no contact order in a TPR.
Describe typical clients:
My clients are members of my community. I have lived on the north side of Milwaukee for more than a decade, in the same zip codes my clients live in. Without exception, every client I have represented in private practice has been indigent, has qualified for court-appointed representation, or, in two unusual cases, has paid a dramatically reduced flat fee for my work. I choose not to represent clients who can afford the fees most private lawyers charge. Though I left the Public Defender’s office in 2016, providing quality representation to clients who cannot afford to hire a lawyer remains my passion, and my commitment to my community.
The vast majority of my clients are Black or Hispanic, reflective of the racial bias these systems are built upon. Many of my clients lack sufficient income to meet their basic needs. Many are unhoused, and are struggling with mental health challenges, food insecurity, unemployment and addiction. This is true of both my child clients and my adult clients. While I do spend most of my days in the courtroom, a large part of my practice involves sitting with people in their most difficult moments, helping to access community resources to meet their most basic needs, and helping people navigate the racist systems designed to incarcerate them and separate their families.
***
Since early in my career, I have enjoyed working with clients some would describe as “difficult”. I’ve represented a large percentage of the Deaf parents involved in the child welfare system in Milwaukee County, and I have learned so much through my work with the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community. Two of my seven jury trials were with the same Deaf mother, and each trial required the assistance of four ASL interpreters and four Deaf interpreters. The Public Defender’s Office often reaches out to me when they have a particularly challenging client to find a lawyer for in a TPR or a delinquency, which is exactly how I wound up representing a ten year old and a twelve year old facing adult homicide charges. Every client is special, but I particularly appreciate the opportunity to work with people others shy away from, the most vulnerable clients prone to marginalization and discrimination by a society that finds them inconvenient, and clients who face unusual challenges.
Number of cases tried to verdict: 7
List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
*Please note, all client names due to the confidential nature of CHIPS and juvenile cases. If actual names are needed, please let me know and I am happy to provide them privately, in compliance with the applicable confidentiality statutes.
Case #1: “Venus” (Milwaukee)
My work with one particular client has shaped my path as a lawyer, and as a human being, more than any other client, case or legal issue. I met Venus in 2007, which was the same year I started on the Intake List in Milwaukee County. I was only five years out of law school, and less than a year into my courtroom experience. In 2007, when a new CHIPS case came in, the clerk would call for an intake attorney to come to court on the overhead pager, with absolutely no additional information about the case or the client. On this day in 2007, I was paged to come to Judge Glenn Yamahiro’s courtroom for a new appointment. I hurried into the courtroom, where the deputy handed me a stack of paperwork that outlined the reasons for the child’s removal from the parental home, and pointed me in the direction of a young woman sitting alone at counsel table. I reached out to shake her hand and introduced myself as her attorney, and asked her if I could have just a moment to read the summary page so I would be better able to help her. Her eyes were bloodshot and tearful, and she rocked back and forth in her seat. She let out a loud, angry sound, slapped my outstretched hand out of the air, snatched the paperwork out of my other hand and ripped it up. The deputy rushed over to us as I tried to calm this young woman, and he eventually retreated as she sat back in her seat and put her head in her hands. Judge Yamahiro explained to me that my client was Deaf, and that we would need to communicate by writing notes back and forth, because the only interpreter present was needed for the court proceedings.
I had never met a Deaf person before. I had no idea in that moment, as I sat with a heartbroken, enraged client that I could not communicate with or help in any meaningful way, that Venus would teach me the most important lessons of my life.
The communication challenges Venus faced became immediately obvious. The State gave an offer of proof, stating in open court that Venus’ infant son had been removed from her care because she lacked the knowledge to care for him, rattling off allegations of neglect. The ADA spoke for about a minute, while I frantically wrote down everything she said since I had no petition to refer to. With no ability to consult my client, I began to object to probable cause and preserve our other legal challenges. Before I could get a whole sentence out, Venus jumped out of her chair and began to scream a series of jumbled, nonsensical curse words, as she flipped the table and rushed toward the ADA. I did not realize at the time that it had taken the entire minute for the interpreter to convey enough of what the ADA had said for Venus to finally have a basic understanding of the allegations. Now the deputy restrained Venus, forcibly guiding her back to her chair as I pulled the table upright. It took several minutes before she was calm enough to proceed. When she did finally compose herself enough to sit down, sobbing violently into her hands, the Court went back on the record. Suddenly, a loud, forceful voice began screaming the same curse words Venus had shouted five minutes earlier. I quickly realized that the interpreter was repeating what Venus had said, complying with his interpreter’s oath to accurately and completely interpret what Venus had said throughout the hearing. I will never forget the chaos of that moment, and what it taught me about language, compassion and patience.
I represented Venus for the next fourteen years. . . .
***
Venus was discriminated against more than any human being I have ever met. She is Deaf. She is Black. She is a woman. She is poor. She was raised in foster care. She has lived through horrifying trauma, and she is often angry and loud. Society has been unkind to Venus, and her trust was hard to earn and easy to lose. Venus taught me to listen. She taught me to break things down to a place where my clients can digest the information – even if it has to be one word at a time. Working with Venus for all of those years helped me to learn to navigate the most insurmountable challenges for every client in my career, because no matter how hard something appears to be for one of my clients, it is inevitably easier to solve than it was for Venus.
Case #2. Reverse Waiver Matters: State vs. NMT (Milwaukee County); State vs. DC (Milwaukee County); State vs. JH (Lincoln County)
These three children are my clients in unrelated homicide cases, but they share a common tragedy: all of these clients are children, and all of them are charged as adults, without any consideration of their development, health or welfare. NMT was charged with First Degree Intentional Homicide at age ten, and faces a mandatory life sentence. DC was charged with the same offense at age twelve, also facing a mandatory life sentence. JH was charged with First Degree Reckless Homicide at age 16, while placed in a correctional setting.
Each of these boys were charged as adults pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 970.032 and 938.183, and I, along with co-counsel . . . have litigated Reverse Waivers for each of these children in the past two years. Wisconsin ranks among the worst states in the country with regard to its original adult jurisdiction laws, requiring children as young as ten who are alleged to have committed certain homicides to be charged as adults. Reverse Waiver is the only tool available for children to ask the Court to move their case to Juvenile Court, but the law pertaining to Reverse Waiver does not include any individualized assessment of the child, makes it nearly impossible for any child to prevail.
***
Aside from the breathtaking gravity of fighting to help a child avoid a lifetime in prison, there are two reasons that these matters have been significant for me. The first is the information we have gathered and exposed in our effort to defend these children. One of the factors the child must prove to win a Reverse Waiver is “if convicted, the juvenile could not receive adequate treatment in the criminal justice system.” (Wis. Stat. §970.032(2)(a)) As we prepared for these proceedings, we struggled to figure out how to present clear evidence of the elephant in the room – the fact that the Wisconsin Department of Corrections is critically understaffed and overcrowded, and access to “treatment” is all but a fallacy in our adult prisons at this time. Everyone knows this to be true, but who would provide credible testimony to that effect? Certainly not anyone from the DOC.
***
The second reason these cases have been significant to me is the appellate work they have led me to do. As public-defender-appointed trial counsel, I am responsible for petitioning the Court of Appeals to hear an appeal of any non-final order. Reverse Waivers fall into the category of permissive appeals, and we lost the Reverse Waivers for NMT and DC within just a few weeks of each other. Attorney Cunningham, who had been my co-counsel throughout the litigation to date, was leaving her practice, so the petitions to the Court of Appeals were my responsibility.
***
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies:
I have litigated three appeals of child abuse and neglect findings before Administrative Law Judges in Milwaukee County since returning to private practice in 2016, and appealed one Kinship denial in the same timeframe. In 2024, I represented a relative caregiver in a foster home licensing revocation appeal as well.
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).
Before starting law school in the fall of 1999, I had spent two years as an Ongoing Case Manager with the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. People’s lives were in my young, inexperienced hands, and I spent all of my days in the homes and schools of the families I served, doing my best to make sure children were safe and families were healing. Transitioning to law school from that kind of hands-on work was unfulfilling and, frankly, boring. I was surprised and disappointed to find out that Marquette University Law School did not have any kind of community-based legal clinics or any other opportunities to work with people in need in the community.
In search of something meaningful to do, I met two 3L students involved in the Public Interest Law Society who wanted to start a walk-in legal clinic in the community. By the time we met, the 3L students were both focused on graduation and running out of time to devote to this project, and my classmate Bridget and I were happy to try to move it forward.
Over the next several years, Bridget and I worked hard to turn the legal clinic into a reality. Our vision was to have hours at a local community center, somewhere accessible to the community and to the law students, where people in need of free legal advice could walk in and be connected with volunteer law students and attorneys, who would sit down and provide as much help as possible in 15-20 minutes. This would include filling out forms, telling people where to go to file things, helping people navigate landlord/tenant issues, and a slew of other issues we could not have anticipated.
By the late spring of my 3rd year of law school, in 2002, the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic (MVLC) opened its doors at a church on 4th and Brown Streets. We had connected with the Association for Women Lawyers, and put together a small steering committee of attorneys and students who would ultimately build the little clinic from the ground up. At first, we had more volunteers than clients, but that quickly changed as word got out. The clinic grew, and we were lucky enough to find a permanent space at the House of Peace, a Capuchin community center on 17th and Walnut.
For the next five years, the majority of my legal work centered around staffing, operating, networking and recruiting for the MVLC. At that time, I was married with two small children at home, and was not the primary earner in the family. I had the time and the energy to devote to the clinic, and watching it grow was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life. Our clinic hours grew busier and busier, and week by week we could see our help making a difference for our clients. Without ever setting foot in a courtroom, we were able to impact thousands of lives in a positive way. We also gave law students an opportunity to participate in real client interviews, while giving back to their community.
The most interesting non-litigation legal work I ever did arose from the MVLC, when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. Hundreds of evacuees landed at the Tommy Thompson dormitory at State Fair, and I quickly realized that we needed to get on site. The steering committee leapt into action, putting together a clinic 5 days a week for 2 hours a day, staffing it with lawyers and students and filling in the shifts ourselves almost daily. The legal issues were unimaginable. The law was foreign, the people were in utter distress, and the atmosphere both devastating and hopeful. It was hard to know where to begin, and sometimes the most helpful thing we could do was listen. It was a frustrating, important project that I am so proud to have been a part of.
In 2007, I became a single parent and needed to provide independently for my daughters, so I had to step back from my intensive volunteer involvement at the MVLC. I still staffed the clinic for a while, and stayed on the steering committee for as long as I could, but finally discontinued my involvement in about 2009.
Today, the MVLC clinics continue to serve clients each week, free of charge, with multiple locations throughout the city. Since 2002, our little clinic has provided pro bono legal assistance to thousands in our community. Over the years, the MVLC has also opened a mobile clinic, as well as clinics that specialize in Immigration and Veteran issues. I will always look back with pride at the impact the MVLC has had in our community, as well as for the students at my alma mater.
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization:
I volunteered for Evan Goyke in his 2018 State Representative race, and his campaign for City Attorney in 2024. I handed out literature for Robyn Vining in 2020, and I believe in 2022 as well. I was briefly a volunteer for my former colleague, Paul Rifelj, in his campaign for Milwaukee County Circuit Court in April of 2016. If memory serves, my children and I handed out literature and signs for Hon. Laura Gramling Perez in her 2012-2013 campaign, as well as Obama for America in the 2008 and 2012 races.
Previous runs for public office: None
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years:
Janet Protasiewicz, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 2023
Milton Childs, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2020
Danielle Shelton, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2019
Brittany Grayson, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2019
Rebecca Kiefer, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2019
M. Joseph Donald, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 2016
Jean Kies, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2016
Paul Rifelj, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2016
Kristy Yang, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2017
Kristela Cervera, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2022
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Beckum Stapleton Little League, vice president of softball, board member, 2021-present
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
Most of my pro bono legal work comes to me through my clients. I am only appointed to assist clients with the specific cases that bring them to Children’s Court, but they are very often in need of additional assistance. I have helped various clients with probate, guardianship, family court matters, evictions, administrative law appeals and various tickets over the years. I would estimate that I assist 3-4 clients per year with collateral legal matters on a pro bono basis. I have also provided a number of Beckum Stapleton families with assistance on a pro bono basis since 2021. (See below.)
Additionally, from September of 1999 through approximately August of 2009, I was a Student Volunteer, a Steering Committee Member and a Volunteer Attorney at the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic. Please refer to Question #25 for an in-depth description of the work I did at the MVLC.
Non-legal Volunteer Service:
I am an avid softball fan, and have played since I was big enough to hold a bat. All of my daughters have played softball since they were small. I coached their rec league teams at Tosa Fastpitch (2008-2016), and from 2017 through 2024, I was an assistant softball coach at Rufus King High School – I still make a guest appearance whenever I can. (My youngest daughter plays softball in high school now, so I am on a four year sabbatical from Rufus King so I can attend my daughter’s games.)
My youngest daughter particularly shares my love for softball. She is a talented pitcher who has been playing on competitive club teams since she was seven. She is bi-racial, and softball is not known for its diversity. Though she is often the best player on her team, she has frequently been bullied and socially excluded on her club teams – until we found Beckum Stapleton.
Beckum Stapleton Little League is the oldest Negro-League based Little League in the country, having just celebrated its 60th year in 2024. My daughter had played tee-ball there when she was five, but they didn’t have a girls’ softball program at that time, so we moved on. However, in the winter of 2021, Beckum started the first softball program within the city of Milwaukee. My daughter signed up to play, and I immediately signed up to coach. The director welcomed us with open arms, and the girls on the team fell in love with the sport, and with each other. We had finally found a place that felt like home.
Five years later, I have coached 18 teams at Beckum, and have helped our softball program grow from those first few players to over 150 players registered in 2025. I joined the board at Beckum Stapleton in 2022, and have served as the Vice President of Softball since 2024. I’ve secured grants to purchase our girls equipment and pay for training, and spend ten to fifteen hours per week volunteering at Beckum in the summer, plus at least five hours per week in the offseason.
Quotes:
Why I want to be a judge:
I applied and interviewed for Gov. Evers’ first judicial appointment in 2019. I’d wanted to be a judge since the day I applied to law school, and I put my heart and soul into preparing for the interview. I researched and studied, trying to guess what questions the committee might ask me about personal injury cases or torts – things I knew next to nothing about. I was a ball of nerves, and almost felt relieved when I wasn’t selected. I really felt like I wasn’t the kind of person who could be a judge, like there was some grandeur or refined presence that judges had to possess, and I am simply not that important or distinguished. In that moment, nearly seven years ago, I was grateful that the judicial selection committee and Gov. Evers saw that I was not judicial material, because I didn’t think I was either.
This conclusion, though flawed, fueled a renewed love for my work as an advocate. I knew I was a good lawyer, and I pushed myself harder – taking the hardest cases, saying yes to every difficult situation that came across my desk. I poured myself into helping my clients share their stories, fighting to keep their kids, fighting for their freedom. I gained confidence as a lawyer, and as a human being. I found new ways to connect with people during a global pandemic, and managed to find time to have fun with my kids at Beckum. During this time, I convinced myself that being a judge was a job for someone far more … judicial … and that I was born to fight injustice in the courtroom. I also detested the idea of becoming a cog in the fundamentally racist systems I had fought so hard against for so long.
Over time, I’ve realized that I was wholeheartedly wrong about myself in 2019. I still don’t know all the answers about commercial contracts and medical malpractice, but I know that I am exactly the kind of person who should be a judge. I’ve served this community in countless ways for nearly 30 years, and I’d always wanted to be a judge because I knew I would be fair and kind. Instead of fighting against injustice, I would be honored to have the opportunity to provide justice in a fair and equitable way. I’m proud of the lawyer I am, and even prouder of the person that I have become. I am still not important in the way my 2019 self believed a judge should be important, but I‘ve realized that the judges I admire and respect most are not that kind of “important” either. They are humble, human, fair, compassionate and consciously, aggressively confront their biases. Those are all my strengths as a lawyer, and as a person, and I would love nothing more than to bring those to the bench.
Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2012 decision upholding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a defining moment for my own family, and for millions of other families nationwide. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012), parts of the ACA were challenged by 26 states, and the Court’s 5-4 decision upheld the ACA.
The legal issues in this case were quite technical, and the facts were not immediately relevant to most Americans, but the implications of this decision reached all corners of our society: affordable access to meaningful healthcare would remain a reality for all people. Not just the wealthy, not just the healthy. Not just families with children, not just the disabled or elderly. Everyone.
I followed the ACA closely from its inception, not just because of the positive implications for my clients, but for my own benefit. When my husband and l divorced in 2008, I lost my health insurance. I had just started my solo practice,
and was making a viable income doing work that I loved. [Redacted] After the birth of my third daughter in 2010, I made the difficult decision to pursue employment at the Wisconsin State Public Defender so I could get health insurance. I took a 40% pay cut, but had access to medical care.
Shortly after the Supreme Court ruled on Sebelius, the ACA saved my daughter’s life. Starting in 2012 [redactions] …
The ACA gave me the opportunity to return to private practice without losing coverage, affording me the time and flexibility to advocate for my child [redactions] … Thousands upon thousands of people have stories just like mine, and the Supreme Court’s decision in Sebelius laid the foundation for the ACA to withstand relentless legal challenges.
Two or three judges whom I admire and why:
To me, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is the bravest, smartest judicial official of our time. The racial and gender-based barriers she faced to even get to the Supreme Court bench proved insurmountable for every Black woman before her – she was held to the highest standard in every possible way, far beyond most justices who make this journey. I simply cannot fathom the vitriol she faced, yet she forged ahead.
Since swearing in as a Justice in 2022, Justice Jackson has taken a strong stance as the most liberal justice on the Court. She has a fiery commitment to justice, fairness and equity that is unprecedented, quickly emerging as one of the few leaders in this country who are not afraid of Donald Trump and his administration. Where her more liberal Supreme Court colleagues take a softer, pragmatic approach, Justice Jackson minces no words in decrying corruption, hate and the swift erosion of the separation of powers under the current administration.
Her passion is not so consuming that it causes her to be short sighted, though. On November 9, 2025, she granted an administrative stay of the lower court’s order to resume distribution of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, immediately halting SNAP benefits for millions. The internet exploded with criticism of this decision, many felt betrayed and shocked that Justice Jackson would let people go hungry. However, Justice Jackson knew that denying the stay would put the matter before the entirety of the Supreme Court immediately, giving the conservative Court a direct opportunity to do far greater damage to the program that so many depend on for their most basic needs. She chose a short term harm to delay or prevent long term catastrophe, in spite of how that decision might look on its face. She is not afraid to upset anyone, even her liberal colleagues and supporters, when she has difficult decisions to make. The law gave her the discretion to grant or to deny the stay, and she did what she could to protect our country’s most vulnerable people within the bounds of the law.
Locally, the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice I admire most is former Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Justice Abrahamson’s approach was one I aspire to achieve: she focused on the impact her decisions made on the actual human beings in her community. Not swayed by large corporations or political interests, Justice Abrahamson applied the law in a way that was fair, just and equal. She was humble, kind and engaging, whether she was talking with a student or a fellow Justice. I met her several times during my work with the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic, and was always in awe of her gentle, calm presence. Her impartial fairness and caring approach to life and the law are qualities I would most want to exemplify on the bench. Her balance and integrity shine through the opinions she wrote, and I’m grateful to have had the chance to meet her.
The proper role of a judge:
The proper role of a judge seems to be a simple question. Of course, judges must fairly and impartially interpret the law, assess credibility and evidence, and carefully make decisions based on the law and the evidence before them. Some, like Chief Justice Roberts, suggest that being a judge is just like being an umpire – your job is just to call balls and strikes, nothing more. This is shortsighted.
While I understand the temptation of such a simple analogy, nothing about the role of the judge is as simple as the role of the umpire. The umpire doesn’t have to assess the credibility of the pitcher, doesn’t have to interpret the intersection of nine different strike zones that might apply to one particular ball, and doesn’t have to consider the safety of the fans when making a call. There is great discretion built into the role of the Circuit Court Judge, and this discretion is critical to consider when looking at the role of a judge.
Ten different judges could interpret a law and its application to a set of facts ten different ways, and often still be within the bounds of their role as judge. Each judge brings their own experiences, background, areas of expertise and lack thereof, as well as their own biases and fears to the bench. For better or for worse, each judge brings to life the application of the law to the cases before them. These biases and fears have allowed for the mass incarceration of African American men, disproportionate sentences from race to race, and the permanent separation of countless families of color, particularly when poverty is also an issue.
Judges sit in positions of great power, entrusted to make decisions about the lives and liberty of those who appear before them. Judges must consider their own biases and assumptions critically, and ensure that their views are not inadvertently (or, for some, quite openly) affecting the way they apply the law.
It is unconstitutional for the law to discriminate against people based on race, class, gender, or other protected classes – yet Wisconsin consistently has the highest incarceration rate of Black individuals in the entire country. The law cannot require the Black men and women of Wisconsin to be incarcerated at twelve times the rate of white people, and it is indisputable that discretion and bias play a critical role in our statewide failure to correct the mass incarceration of Black and Latinx residents. Mass incarceration is just one measure of the racial inequities in our state, but the data regarding the separation of Black and Latinx families is just as bleak. Correcting the failures of those who came before us is a difficult task, but one that cannot be addressed until those making the decisions are willing to acknowledge that the work must be done.