Wisconsin tees up high-stakes Supreme Court race with partisan control on the line
Wisconsin is preparing for a high stakes election of the state Supreme Court that will determine the balance of power in just a few months, after President-elect Trump won this battleground state.
Susan Crawford, the Dane County judge and Brad Schimel, former Attorney General of Wisconsin (R), are competing for the seat that liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley is retiring from. The high court currently has a liberal 4-3 split. Bradley’s departure changes the balance of power to a 3-to-3 split.
The Republicans are anxious to gain a seat in the court, after they lost a crucial Wisconsin Supreme Court election two years ago. This gave Democrats control of the court for the first 15 years.
Rusty Schultz worked for the former Wisconsin Governor. Scott Walker’s (R) and Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis. ) campaigns noted that “conservatives have started to realize the importance of courts.”
|
He explained, “I think that there was a sense of apprehension, or maybe just misunderstanding, because we had been pulling all three levers for so long and took the court for granted.” “I think that in 2023 after that defeat, people began to realize that.”
The voters will head to the polls in early 2019 to decide which candidate they want to fill the vacancy at the highest court of the state. Crawford and Schimel have been the only candidates to date, but there may be others who decide to run.
Although Wisconsin Supreme Court elections are technically nonpartisan races, both candidates have clearly focused on issues that resonated with their Republican or Democratic base.
Schimel is best known as the former Republican Attorney General of Wisconsin, but he is also a Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge. His website highlights his tenure as Wisconsin Attorney General — “the State’s Top Cop,” according to his campaign — as well as his advocacy for crime victims, and his work against opioid abuse.
Schimel told The Hill that he felt “compelled” to run after observing the outcome of the 2023 Supreme Court race.
“We had an office candidate who won by promising to rule on cases and the other — other liberals were applauding this.” He said that they were “just wildly in support of it”, alluding then-liberal Janet Protasiewicz who angered Republicans when she claimed to believe in women’s right to choose their own abortion and called state electoral maps “rigged”.
Protasiewicz has never stated how she will rule in any case before her. However, this did not quieten the criticism from Republicans.
Crawford’s campaign noted that she was a representative of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, and protected workers’ and voting rights. She also touched on the crime issue, citing her experience as an assistant attorney general in the Wisconsin Department of Justice.
Sam Roecker is a consultant who worked for Protasiewicz in 2023 and for Crawford in 2019. He acknowledged that the issues are similar but that “the core issue remains whether we want to have a Wisconsin court that’s impartial and fair or one that rubber stamps a right-wing, extreme agenda?”
Early signs suggest that the race is becoming personal.
Crawford’s campaign has already described Schimel as “a right-wing extremist.” She, along with Wisconsin Democrats, targeted him on issues such as abortion. They noted that he signed a Wisconsin Right to Life White Paper in 2012 which argued that “Wisconsin’s unborn children would be best protected” if the state’s abortion law of 1849 is kept rather than a Personhood Amendment if Roe V. Wade is overturned.
“That was long ago.” Schimel said to The Hill that he had done this when he was a judge in a previous role. “I would never — I would not sign anything like that, because it would be inappropriate in my role as an officer of the court.”
“I cannot be clearer when I state that as a Supreme Court justice, I’m not running to overturn the will of people. “I will respect the laws as they are,” he said. “Unless they violate the Constitution, I will uphold the wishes of the people by these laws.”
Schimel said in a press release that Crawford’s candidacy was a sign she didn’t care about Wisconsinites.
He argued, “I spent my career upholding and defending Wisconsin law while she spent most of hers suing Wisconsin.”
Roecker dismissed these attacks by saying Crawford “fought to protect rights and liberties.”
She has “been both a prosecutor and a judge. She has held criminals responsible.” She has prosecuted violent criminals. Roecker stated, “I think it’s clear.” She’s also an attorney. As an attorney, she fought for access to reproductive health care. She fought for worker’s rights.
The 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court election and the one next year have uncanny similarities. Both races are a measure of which party controls the high court of Wisconsin. So far, this year’s race seems to be focusing on issues similar to the last one: abortion and criminality. This campaign has already shown signs that it may turn ugly, just as it did in the previous cycle.
Wisconsin’s most recent state Supreme Court election broke a record in terms of spending on a state judicial race, and observers predict that the same will happen next year.
The Badger State was one of the seven battlegrounds states and there are few opportunities to change the partisan balance on one of these high courts. In recent years, the court has made some of its most important rulings. These include dismissing challenges to the results of the 2020 elections in Wisconsin, ordering the creation new maps for the state Legislature, and allowing the use drop boxes during the 2024 presidential election.
The court will likely issue a ruling on a case involving the 1849 state abortion law, which prohibits almost all abortions.
Howard Schweber, professor of Political Science and Legal Studies at the University of Wisconsin Madison, explained some of the issues that are worth keeping an eye out on: abortion, elections and Act 10 – the Walker-era legislation which curtailed the collective bargaining rights of many public employees – redistricting, and religious freedom.
Schweber said that, if Schimel won the case, the court would likely see another lawsuit regarding the maps of the state Legislature. He expected a conservative majority to be more tolerant of religious groups and other entities, “sort of following the Roberts Court’s decision in removing traditional barriers between state and church.”
“If Crawford wins I expect the Wisconsin Supreme Court to do what other state courts did, which is say that the U.S. Supreme Court has the right to say anything.
No Comments