Edit Opinions & View point

Susan Crawford has emerged victorious in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, securing a seat that ensures liberals maintain their narrow 4-3 majority on the state’s highest court. The race, marked by unprecedented campaign spending, drew national attention due to its potential influence on crucial issues like abortion rights, labor laws, and redistricting in a key battleground state.

Crawford, a Dane County circuit judge with strong Democratic backing, defeated Waukesha County circuit judge and former Republican attorney general Brad Schimel. The election, technically nonpartisan, became one of the most expensive state Supreme Court contests in U.S. history, highlighting the intensifying political stakes surrounding judicial appointments.

The outcome delivers a blow to conservatives who had hoped to reclaim control of the court. It also underscores the evolving strategy of Democrats, who successfully framed the election as a referendum on political influence and judicial integrity. National figures closely watched the race, given Wisconsin’s history as a pivotal swing state in presidential elections. Crawford’s win ensures that liberals will hold a decisive vote in upcoming cases that could shape Wisconsin’s legal landscape for years. Among the most pressing matters are challenges to the state’s abortion laws, labor rights disputes, and potential redistricting battles that could impact future elections.

The campaign was defined by significant financial investment from both sides. Conservative-aligned donors and interest groups poured millions into ads supporting Schimel, while liberal organizations countered with extensive outreach and messaging. Progressive groups particularly focused on the role of outside money in judicial elections, positioning Crawford as a defender of judicial independence. Schimel, who leaned on endorsements from conservative leaders, positioned himself as a defender of traditional judicial values and law enforcement. In the final weeks of the campaign, he sought to rally conservative voters by emphasizing issues like crime and judicial activism. However, Crawford’s focus on reproductive rights and her opposition to partisan gerrymandering appeared to resonate with voters, particularly in urban and suburban areas.

Beyond the candidates themselves, the election underscored broader national debates about the role of money in politics and the increasing polarization of judicial races. Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has played a critical role in recent years, ruling on major cases involving elections, voting rights, and public policy. With Crawford’s victory, liberals retain a critical advantage in shaping these decisions. The race also serves as a potential blueprint for future elections, demonstrating how judicial contests can become focal points for national political battles. As other states prepare for similar elections, the strategies and outcomes in Wisconsin will likely influence campaign tactics and spending patterns.

As Crawford prepares to assume her role on the bench, attention now turns to how the court will handle the pressing legal issues before it. With key cases pending on abortion access, collective bargaining, and legislative redistricting, her decisions could have far-reaching consequences for Wisconsin’s legal and political landscape. The impact of this election is expected to be felt for years, solidifying the state’s Supreme Court as one of the most influential in shaping policy outcomes in the Midwest.