Who Won Wisconsin Supreme Court
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has long been a battleground for ideological supremacy, with its 4-3 conservative majority shaping pivotal rulings on voting rights, redistricting, and abortion.
The 2023 election, however, marked a seismic shift when liberal Judge Janet Protasiewicz defeated conservative Dan Kelly, flipping the court’s balance for the first time in 15 years.
But who truly? Beyond the electoral victory, this outcome reflects deeper tensions over judicial legitimacy, partisan influence, and the court’s role in democracy.
While Protasiewicz’s victory signaled a progressive resurgence, the real winner remains contested: Was it Wisconsin voters rejecting gerrymandering, Democrats securing a policy backstop, or dark money groups manipulating judicial elections? A critical analysis reveals a fractured system where justice is increasingly politicized, and electoral outcomes mask systemic vulnerabilities.
# Protasiewicz centered her campaign on Wisconsin’s extreme partisan gerrymandering, calling the maps rigged (Marley,, 2023).
Post-election, the new liberal majority swiftly agreed to hear, a case challenging GOP-drawn districts.
Legal scholars like Nicholas Stephanopoulos (Harvard Law) argue such judicial intervention is vital in states where legislatures suppress competition (, 2022).
Critics, however, contend courts overreach by invalidating maps.
Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley accused Protasiewicz of pre-judging cases, undermining judicial impartiality (, 2023).
# 2.
Dark Money’s Shadow3.
Abortion and the Backlash EffectCritical PerspectivesLiberal View: A Victory for DemocracyConservative View: Judicial Activism Unleashed Opponents frame Protasiewicz’s win as a partisan power grab.
The editorial board (2023) warned of legislating from the bench, citing her comments on maps and abortion as evidence of bias.
Federalist Society scholars echo this, asserting judges should defer to legislatures (, 2022).
# Nonpartisan analysts like the Brennan Center argue Wisconsin exemplifies the crisis of judicial elections.
States like Michigan and Ohio have adopted reforms (public financing, nonpartisan primaries), but Wisconsin’s system remains a wild west of unchecked spending (Geyh,, 2020).
Protasiewicz’s victory reshaped Wisconsin’s judiciary, but the broader battle over the court’s integrity persists.
Gerrymandering, dark money, and single-issue voting reveal a system where justice is transactional.
The 2023 election wasn’t just a liberal win it was a stress test for American democracy, proving that without structural reforms, judicial elections will remain proxy wars for partisan dominance.
As Wisconsin’s new majority takes power, the question lingers: Can a politicized court deliver impartial justice, or has the state’s judiciary become just another legislature in robes? - Brennan Center for Justice.
(2023).
- Marley, P.
(2023).
.
- Stephanopoulos, N.
(2022).
- Editorial Board.
(2023).
- AP VoteCast.
(2023).