Wisconsin Lawyer Stephanie Rapkin Suspended for One Year Following Conviction for Spitting on Teenager During 2020 Protest

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has handed down a one-year suspension of the law license of Stephanie Rapkin, a Wisconsin-based attorney whose criminal conviction for spitting in the face of a Black teenager during a 2020 social justice demonstration sparked widespread public condemnation. In a unanimous ruling issued on Thursday, the state’s highest court determined that Rapkin’s actions constituted a severe breach of professional ethics, noting explicitly that the incident served as “an embarrassment to the bar.”

The disciplinary measure concludes a protracted legal and regulatory saga stemming from an altercation in the Milwaukee suburb of Shorewood. Beyond the high-profile confrontation, regulatory authorities also cited Rapkin for unrelated professional misconduct, including the mismanagement of an estate and the imposition of nearly $19,000 in improper fees. The cumulative weight of these infractions ultimately persuaded the court that a temporary revocation of her legal credentials was not only warranted, but necessary to protect the integrity of the judicial system.

The 2020 Shorewood Incident and Criminal Proceedings

The disciplinary action traces its roots back to June 6, 2020, a period of intense civil unrest and nationwide protests following the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers. Rapkin, then practicing law in the Milwaukee area, encountered a group of demonstrators participating in a Black Lives Matter protest in Shorewood, Wisconsin.

According to court filings and video evidence that subsequently circulated widely across news and social media platforms, an argument ensued between Rapkin and several teenage protesters. The confrontation escalated when Rapkin approached a 17-year-old Black teenager and spat directly in his face. The physical assault was captured on film by multiple bystanders, providing investigators with clear visual documentation of the offense.

In the immediate aftermath of the incident, public outcry was swift. Community members and legal advocacy organizations called for immediate accountability, pointing out that members of the legal profession are held to a heightened standard of conduct both inside and outside the courtroom. Law enforcement officials investigated the matter, and prosecutors subsequently filed criminal charges against Rapkin.

The path to a criminal resolution was marked by legal maneuvers and delays. It was not until April 2023—nearly three years after the initial confrontation—that Rapkin was formally convicted of misdemeanor disorderly conduct in connection with the spitting incident. While the criminal court imposed its penalties, the professional ramifications remained pending as the state’s attorney regulation bodies reviewed the ethical dimensions of her behavior.

Professional Misconduct and Disciplinary Investigations

In addition to the criminal conviction, the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) initiated parallel disciplinary proceedings against Rapkin. The OLR complaint detailed not only the conduct surrounding the 2020 protest but also separate, serious allegations concerning Rapkin’s handling of client funds and probate matters.

According to findings cited by Wisconsin Public Radio and incorporated into the Supreme Court’s review, Rapkin was found to have severely mismanaged an estate under her care. Investigators determined that she had charged approximately $19,000 in improper fees to the estate, a direct violation of fiduciary duties expected of licensed attorneys.

Furthermore, Rapkin’s engagement with the disciplinary process itself drew sharp criticism from the court and its appointed referees. When the OLR and the court-appointed referee attempted to investigate the financial and behavioral complaints, Rapkin repeatedly failed to respond. Her sole communication with the investigating bodies consisted of an electronic mail message asserting that she had retired from the active practice of law—a defense that the Supreme Court and regulatory authorities deemed insufficient to bypass ethical accountability.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Ruling and Judicial Reasoning

In its Thursday ruling, the Wisconsin Supreme Court evaluated the totality of Rapkin’s misconduct, weighing the criminal conviction against her professional obligations as an officer of the court. The justices emphasized that an attorney’s license is a privilege dependent upon maintaining high standards of honesty, trustworthiness, and respect for the law.

The court’s written order underscored the gravity of the physical assault, framing it not merely as a personal failing, but as an act that directly undermined public confidence in the legal profession. By targeting a minor during a peaceful demonstration centered on civil rights, Rapkin demonstrated a profound lapse in judgment that reflected poorly on the entire state bar.

When combined with the financial exploitation discovered in the estate mismanagement case and her subsequent stonewalling of investigators, the court found that a lesser sanction would be wholly inadequate. Consequently, the justices ordered a one-year suspension of her law license, ensuring that she cannot legally represent clients or hold herself out as an attorney during the entirety of the suspension period. Should she seek to resume practicing law after the year concludes, she will be required to petition the court and demonstrate adherence to all reinstatement conditions.

Broader Implications for Legal Ethics and Professional Conduct

The suspension of Stephanie Rapkin highlights ongoing debates within the American legal community regarding the accountability of attorneys for out-of-court behavior, particularly actions driven by political or racial animus. State bar associations and supreme courts across the United States have increasingly scrutinized how personal misconduct outside the scope of traditional legal representation impacts an attorney’s fitness to practice.

Legal ethicists point out that Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which have been adopted in various forms across most jurisdictions, explicitly prohibit conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, as well as any criminal act that reflects adversely on an attorney’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects. When an attorney is convicted of a violent or disorderly misdemeanor—especially one involving physical hostility toward a member of the public—regulatory bodies face immense pressure to intervene to preserve the public trust.

Moreover, the case underscores the intersection of modern digital media and professional discipline. Without the video footage captured by teenage protesters and bystanders in Shorewood, the altercation might have remained a he-said-she-said local dispute. Instead, the immediate dissemination of the recording served as vital evidence that expedited both criminal charges and regulatory scrutiny, demonstrating how digital accountability continues to reshape traditional administrative and judicial processes.

As the legal profession grapples with issues of equity, bias, and professional decorum, rulings such as the one issued by the Wisconsin Supreme Court serve as a definitive statement that behavior violating basic social contracts and criminal laws carries tangible professional consequences. For Rapkin, the one-year suspension marks a formal rebuke from the highest levels of her state’s judiciary, closing a contentious chapter that began on a suburban street corner more than six years ago.