What does a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice do?
The Wisconsin State Supreme Court is made up of seven justices, elected to 10-year terms in statewide, nonpartisan April elections. The court needs at least four votes for a majority opinion to make law. Otherwise, concurring, dissenting or plurality opinions are nonbinding.
The Supreme Court has the final say on many state issues, including the interpretation of the Wisconsin Constitution, the interpretation of Wisconsin state laws and reviewing the actions of other state officials, such as governors and agency officials at the state and local levels.
Currently, Wisconsin’s government is divided. There’s a Democratic governor and a Democratic attorney general, along with a GOP-controlled state Legislature. That means there’s not a lot of consensus, and many issues end up in the courts, from abortion to redistricting to unionizing for state employees.
Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, who is backed by liberals, and Waukesha County Judge and former Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel, who is backed by conservatives, are running in the April 1 election.
This election is nonpartisan. What does that mean and is that actually true?
Wisconsin Supreme Court races are officially nonpartisan, so you're not going to see a D (Democratic) or an R (Republican) next to the candidates' names. But political parties have become more involved in the court races.
You’ll hear some candidates say that politics do not have a place in deciding cases. But, candidates have ways of making their ideological leanings known. Voters can draw conclusions about a candidate’s leanings based on what groups or individuals have endorsed them. The parties are very much involved in the race, with Republican and Democratic political action committees spending money on advertisements and Republican and Democratic leaders endorsing candidates.
As the Associated Press reports, the 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court race, which was also for ideological control of the court, was the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. The 2025 race is shaping up to be even more expensive.
It has already garnered national attention from multi-billionaire Elon Musk, a loyalist of President Donald Trump, as well as Democratic philanthropist George Soros.
What’s at stake?
The court’s ideological balance is at stake. The one seat up for grabs will either maintain the court’s narrow liberal majority or return the court to conservative control, as it was for 14 of the past 16 years.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court is officially nonpartisan. But, Justices Rebecca Dallet, Jill Karofsky, Janet Protasiewicz and Ann Walsh Bradley are frequently described as liberals, while Justices Annette Ziegler, Brian Hagedorn and Rebecca Bradley are described as conservatives.
Hagedorn is frequently a swing vote. He usually sides with conservatives but sometimes aligns with the court’s liberal wing. Nonetheless, with Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, described as a liberal, retiring, this opens up an opportunity for conservatives to take control or for liberals to maintain control.
From 2009 to 2023, conservatives controlled the court, issuing decisions that upheld a voter ID law, limited union rights, expanded gun rights, banned absentee ballot drop boxes, curbed the powers of the Democratic governor, and upheld legislative maps that favored Republicans.
In 2023, Justice Janet Protasiewicz was elected, giving liberals a majority. Since then, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has approved legislative district maps drawn by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, which are less favorable to Republicans. The court also reversed a prior decision on absentee ballot drop boxes, allowing for their use in the state again.
Keep reading for more information on some of the high-profile issues Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has decided or may decide in the future.
What’s the impact of the court on Legislative and Congressional district maps?
Redistricting means producing state and congressional-level voting district lines every ten years when new Census data comes out. In Wisconsin, after the 2010 Census, Republicans created maps that locked in almost a permanent majority for them at the state level.
In Dec. 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court threw out the legislative electoral maps that cemented those Republican majorities in the state's Assembly and Senate. That meant that in February 2024, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers signed maps that he proposed into law. The Legislature passed those Evers-drawn maps to avoid having the state Supreme Court draw the lines.
In November 2024, Democrats flipped 10 seats in the state Assembly and four seats in the state Senate, reducing Republicans’ majority.
The court declined to take up a case challenging Wisconsin’s Congressional districts. Liberal law firms are contemplating how to get this before the court in future years, according to reporting from Wisconsin Watch.
Will Wisconsin uphold legal abortion access in the state?
Abortion is currently before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The court heard arguments in November but has not issued a decision. Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul originally sued to block an 1849 law that is interpreted by some as criminalizing abortion in every circumstance except to save the life of the mother, opening up health care workers who provide abortions to prosecution and prison time.
A trial court judge ruled in July 2023 that the 1849 law does not apply to abortions but instead criminalizes feticide—when someone else kills a mother’s baby without her consent.
The court is now considering whether the 1849 law is referencing feticide, not abortion, and other legal issues, such as whether the Wisconsin Constitution can be read as protecting abortion access as part of a larger right to privacy—sometimes known as bodily autonomy—included in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that is written into the state constitution.
Although it hasn’t yet issued a decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will be instrumental in deciding whether abortion procedures remain lawful in the state.
Will the court support the ability of state employees to collectively bargain?
In December, a trial court struck down Act 10, the law that gutted collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin for most public sector employees, including in state agencies, universities and school districts.
Act 10 caused weeks of protests in 2011 at the Wisconsin State Capitol. People organized against the GOP-led Legislature and the administration of Republican Gov. Scott Walker. A federal court upheld the law in April 2014, which has effectively reduced the ability of those public sector employees to organize and join unions and negotiate wages and benefits.
That case is likely headed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
The trial court ruled that the Legislature didn’t have a “reasonable rationale” for allowing municipal police officers, municipal firefighters, deputy sheriffs, state traffic patrol and state motor vehicle inspectors to collectively bargain, but not including categories like Capitol Police, UW police and conservation wardens.
Will the court uphold the [currently Democratic] governor’s and attorney general’s powers?
When Democrats won statewide races for governor and attorney general in 2018, the Republican-led Legislature passed laws that restricted the powers of those offices in a “lame-duck” session.
One change required the state attorney general to get permission from the GOP-led Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee before filing civil suits. It also diminished Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul’s ability to settle lawsuits. If corporations settle lawsuits on environmental or consumer protection issues, Kaul would have to seek legislative approval for the settlements, which sometimes involve millions of dollars.
In July 2020, the then-conservative-controlled state supreme court upheld the “lame-duck” laws. Kaul filed another suit, and the issue is again before the now liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has also weighed in on the emergency power of the governor or other executive agencies – whether to uphold or limit his ability to order mask mandates and safer-at-home orders during the COVID-19 pandemic.
How does the court weigh in on voting access?
The court ruled in July 2022 that most ballot drop boxes aren't allowed in Wisconsin and that a voter can't have someone else return—in person—their completed absentee ballot on their behalf. In July 2024, the court—this time with a liberal majority—ruled that drop boxes are lawful again.
The state Supreme Court decided a number of cases that affected voting during the 2020 election. In April 2020, the conservative-controlled court ruled that the state was required to move forward with its April presidential primary during the COVID-19 pandemic.
After the 2020 election, President Donald Trump attempted to overturn his election loss by asking the courts to disqualify more than 200,000 ballots from Dane and Milwaukee counties. Three of four conservative justices would have allowed Trump’s lawsuit to go forward, but swing Justice Brian Hagedorn sided with liberals, resulting in a narrow 4-3 rejection of Trump’s lawsuit.
The court will be able to take up more voting and election law cases in the future.
Need help learning how to vote on April 1, 2025? Our voter guide has the information you need on the voting process, how to participate and who the candidates are.
