News & Articles

Judge Susan Crawford

If you are feeling deja vu about the Wisconsin Supreme Court election you are not imagining things. You have seen this movie before. The election on Tuesday, April 1, is a rerun of the 2020 and 2023 contests. The names have changed but the issues are the same.

In 2020 and 2023 Jill Karofsky and Janet Protasiewicz, both liberal jurists, won their elections, defeating conservative Dan Kelly. Kelly had been appointed to the Supreme Court in 2016 by Gov. Scott Walker. The victory of Protasiewicz created a liberal majority on the court after many years of conservative control. 

These were both record-breaking battles between women judges with a positive, progressive judicial philosophy and a male judge with a backward, extremely conservative philosophy (called “originalism” – more below). 

Who controls the Supreme Court is important. As Barry Burden, UW-Madison Political Science professor, has said, “I think the Supreme Court races have become as important as any other race in the state. It’s become the one election that really decides the direction of the state.” 

Now in 2025 another liberal woman, Susan Crawford, is running to maintain the 4 to 3 liberal majority. Her opponent is conservative Brad Schimel, who was and awful state Attorney General during part of Walker’s time in office. Schimel is another reactionary believer in judicial “originalism.” So once again the judicial orientation of the Supreme Court – and thus the well being of the people of Wisconsin – is on the ballot.

The nonpartisan Wisconsin League of Women Voters explains the issues for this election.  

“Voters must pay close attention to this race because the court’s rulings will influence fundamental rights and the future of democracy in Wisconsin. This election is about more than just one seat – it’s about safeguarding the rights and freedoms of all Wisconsin residents.” 

There are major court decisions coming up on voting rights, gerrymandering, reproductive rights, labor unions and environmental protection. The outcome of these cases will impact people and communities across the state for years to come. 

So the April 1st election is not one voters should ignore. In 2019 conservative judge Brian Hagedorn won that year’s Supreme Court race by only 6,000 votes. In that election 75% of eligible voters did not bother to vote. This year’s Supreme Court election is expected to be very close. Every vote is going to count. 

How should voters decide who to vote for? 

The League of Women Voters advise voters to look at which candidate aligns with your personal values. What issues and policies are important to you and your family? Which candidate matches your concerns best?

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court elections are officially nonpartisan. But this does not mean that politics and political philosophy are not involved in judicial decisions. The notion that judges should be blindly impartial and above politics is simply unrealistic. All judges are human and are impacted by their own values, beliefs and backgrounds. This is why it is important for voters know the judicial and political philosophy of judicial candidates and to vote accordingly.

Conservative judicial candidates claim to be the righteous adherents to original interpretations of the Constitutional and to the original legislative intent of laws. This concept of “originalism” is a core dogma of conservatives because it serves their political agenda. It sounds good, but is just a legalistic cover for ruling against social legislation, business regulations, equal rights and similar laws they oppose for political reasons. 

This makes great soundbites for attack ads targeting liberal “activist judges” who nefariously “legislate from the bench.” But this narrative is misleading and hypocritical. Voters should ignore all the obnoxious attack ads.

Conservative judges frequently twist the law to achieve the outcomes they want to see. Our current U.S. Supreme Court is a prime example. They have blatantly ignored past precedents and legislative intent to overturn long established interpretations of the Constitution and “settled law.” The current court’s rulings on reproductive rights, gun laws, civil rights, voting rights and labor unions are proof.

In the real world judges do look at law makers original intent in deciding cases. They do look at prior cases for precedents. But they also look at the spirit of the law and apply laws to changing societal norms, technologies, and the circumstances of specific cases. When judges apply old laws to new situations justice may require interpretations that are different from the original understandings because we don’t live in the same world anymore. 

Being tied to a dogmatic principle of law does not make a judge more impartial or a better judge. In fact the better judge would seek justice for individuals rather than loyalty to some legalistic dogma.

You don’t have to be a Constitutional scholar to know that the founding fathers were mostly rich white males of property. Many were slave owners and intended for slavery to continue, women to have no rights and working people to be prevented from having political power. All this was written into the Constitution. 

Since then, through constitutional amendments, progressive legislation and judicial rulings, we have come a long way toward a more democratic society. Voters need to remember these facts. 

If we want social progress in the 21st century we have to elect representatives and judges who will move us forward. We should not be tied to a fictional version of the 18th century.

This year’s Supreme Court election is also a rerun for the huge amount of money being spent.  The 2023 election was the most expensive state judicial race in U.S. history. Candidates, political parties and special interest groups spent over $45 million on the race. This year’s election is expected even more expensive. 

Even more troubling is the number of big dollar donors pouring money into Wisconsin elections. News reports are saying Elon Musk plans to donate millions to buy the election for Brad Schimel. Musk spent $250 million to get Trump elected and secure an extraordinary amount of influence with Trump. He is now attempting to buy a compliant Wisconsin Supreme Court. This should be a huge red flag for Wisconsin voters.

Voters need to choose the Supreme Court candidate who best fits their personal values and interests. This is unlikely to be a candidate bought and paid for by an out-of-state billionaire. 

On April 1, vote for your own best interests. Vote for the future well being of your children and grandchildren. Vote for Judge Susan Crawford.