In a landmark decision on April 1, 2025, Wisconsin voters delivered a resounding message in the state's most expensive judicial race in history. Liberal Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford defeated her conservative opponent, Brad Schimel, by a margin of approximately 55% to 45%. The win preserved a narrow 4–3 liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, a balance that will have significant implications for issues such as abortion rights, voting laws, and redistricting. The Wisconsin Supreme Court election results have not only set new spending records but also ignited a fierce debate about the role of money and outside influence in the judicial process.
 |
| Susan Crawford’s |
(toc)
Background of the Race
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has long been a battleground for ideological conflicts in state politics. Although judicial elections are officially nonpartisan, the court is widely recognized for its ideological leanings. Prior to this election, the court held a 4–3 liberal majority, which has allowed progressive justices to influence rulings on major issues.
-
Key Figures:
-
Susan Crawford: A Dane County Circuit Court judge, widely endorsed by Democratic donors and liberal justices, who campaigned on a platform emphasizing fairness, access to justice, and defense of civil liberties.
-
Brad Schimel: A Waukesha County Circuit Court judge and former state attorney general, endorsed by former President Donald Trump and financially backed by billionaire Elon Musk.
-
-
Record-Setting Campaign Spending:
-
Total campaign spending in the race approached nearly $100 million, breaking all previous records for judicial contests in the United States.
-
Elon Musk and his affiliated groups invested over $21 million in support of Schimel, employing controversial tactics that included distributing $1 million checks to individual voters to sign a petition against “activist” judges.
-
Election Day Highlights and Key Details
The election, held on April 1, 2025, was marked by unprecedented voter engagement and high turnout, particularly in urban centers like Madison and Milwaukee. Despite heavy spending by conservative backers, Crawford’s campaign message resonated with voters who were increasingly skeptical of large-scale financial interventions in judicial races.
Notable Aspects of the Election:
-
Voter Turnout:
High voter participation was noted across the state, especially in traditionally liberal strongholds, where Crawford’s margins were even more significant. -
Controversial Spending:
-
Elon Musk’s involvement became a focal point of the campaign. His America PAC’s strategies, which included paying voters directly, were heavily criticized by Democrats as attempts to “buy” the election.
-
Campaign advertisements frequently highlighted Musk’s role, with Crawford’s supporters arguing that the influence of unelected billionaires undermines democratic processes.
-
-
Impact of Endorsements:
-
Prominent figures such as former President Barack Obama endorsed Crawford, further energizing progressive voters.
-
In contrast, Schimel’s campaign was bolstered by endorsements from Trump and other conservative leaders, though these endorsements did not translate into enough voter support.
-
The Campaign Issues and Messaging
Both candidates campaigned vigorously, but the central narrative quickly evolved into a referendum on outside influence in judicial elections. Crawford’s campaign focused on integrity, independence, and the fundamental principle that justice should not be for sale. In her victory speech, she declared,
“Today Wisconsinites fended off an unprecedented attack on our democracy, our fair elections and our Supreme Court. Wisconsin stood up and said loudly that justice does not have a price, our courts are not for sale.”
Key Issues Raised During the Campaign:
-
Judicial Independence:
Voters were encouraged to consider the importance of an impartial judiciary free from external financial influences. The race was framed as a battle against the commodification of judicial power. -
Influence of Money in Politics:
The race underscored concerns about the increasing role of billionaires like Elon Musk in political processes. The heavy financial investment by Musk’s America PAC sparked debates about whether such spending distorts democratic choice. -
Impact on Future Legal Rulings:
With the Wisconsin Supreme Court poised to hear cases on contentious topics such as abortion rights, union protections, and congressional redistricting, the ideological balance of the court is critical. A liberal majority is likely to lead to rulings that safeguard progressive policies, while a conservative majority could shift the balance on these issues.
Expert Opinions and Analysis
Political analysts and legal experts have been closely watching the race, citing its broader implications for state and national politics. Many view the election result as a bellwether for upcoming midterm elections, suggesting that voters may be rejecting extreme outside influence in all areas of governance.
Expert Insights:
-
Political Strategists:
Republican strategist Pam Van Handel expressed surprise at the result, noting that she had expected Musk’s financial clout to secure a win for Schimel. Instead, the outcome appears to signal voter fatigue with overt financial interference. -
Legal Scholars:
Experts argue that maintaining a liberal majority on the state Supreme Court will likely influence future decisions on key legal battles, particularly those involving reproductive rights and voting laws. -
Impact on National Politics:
Democrats have touted the result as a clear message against the Trump administration’s allies and the increasing role of private money in public office. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries praised the voters for standing up against what he called “an unelected, unpopular, unhinged billionaire puppet master.”
Implications for the Future
The Wisconsin Supreme Court election results carry weight far beyond the immediate contest. With the court’s decisions directly impacting critical issues, this victory is seen as a safeguard for progressive policies in Wisconsin.
Long-Term Implications:
-
Abortion and Voting Rights:
The court is expected to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of abortion rights and voting laws in Wisconsin. A liberal majority is likely to favor rulings that protect and expand these rights. -
Redistricting and Political Influence:
The balance of the court will also affect how redistricting cases are decided. With congressional maps potentially being redrawn, the ideological tilt of the court could alter the political landscape for years to come. -
Campaign Finance and Judicial Elections:
The record-breaking spending in this race may prompt calls for reforms in campaign finance laws, especially concerning judicial elections. Critics argue that the influence of money in these contests undermines public trust in the impartiality of the courts.
Conclusion
Susan Crawford’s victory in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election is a decisive moment for the state and potentially for national politics. By preserving a liberal majority on the court, voters have ensured that progressive values will continue to shape key legal decisions on issues from abortion rights to redistricting. The election also served as a powerful rebuke to attempts by billionaires and political outsiders to sway judicial outcomes through massive financial contributions.
As Wisconsin and the nation reflect on these results, questions remain about the future of campaign finance reforms and the role of money in our democratic institutions. The implications of this election will undoubtedly resonate well beyond the courtroom, influencing public policy and voter engagement for years to come.
We invite you to share your thoughts on this historic election and its impact on Wisconsin’s judicial future. Comment below, share this article on social media, and subscribe to our newsletter for more in-depth coverage of landmark political events.