Wi Supreme Court Election Results
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court elections have long been battlegrounds for ideological and partisan clashes, reflecting the state’s deep political divisions.
In April 2023, the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz a liberal-leaning judge flipped the court’s majority for the first time in 15 years, sparking fierce debates over judicial impartiality, electoral influence, and the role of money in state courts.
With high-stakes cases on abortion rights, redistricting, and voting laws pending, the election’s outcome carried national implications.
Yet beneath the surface, questions linger about the integrity of judicial elections, the influence of dark money, and whether Wisconsin’s judiciary can remain independent in an era of hyperpolarization.
While the 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court election marked a pivotal shift in the state’s judicial landscape, the campaign’s unprecedented spending, partisan rhetoric, and allegations of undue influence raise serious concerns about the erosion of judicial neutrality and the broader implications for democracy.
# The 2023 race shattered national spending records for a judicial election, exceeding, more than double the previous high.
Much of this funding came from out-of-state donors and opaque political organizations.
The liberal-leaning group, funded by Illinois billionaire J.
B.
Pritzker, poured millions into Protasiewicz’s campaign, while conservative groups like backed her opponent, Dan Kelly.
A 2022 Brennan Center report found that between 2010-2020 came from undisclosed sources, undermining transparency.
Legal scholars like Joanna Shepherd (Emory Law) warn that such spending creates eroding public trust.
# Unlike federal judges, Wisconsin’s justices are elected in races.
Protasiewicz openly campaigned on issues like abortion rights and gerrymandering, stating, a rare admission for a judicial candidate.
Critics, including former Justice Michael Gableman (a conservative), argue this blurs the line between law and politics, violating judicial ethics.
However, defenders, such as UW-Madison law professor Robert Yablon, contend that on judicial philosophies, especially given the court’s role in shaping policy.
The dilemma remains: Should judges campaign like politicians, or does doing so compromise their impartiality? # The election’s outcome was seen as a referendum on Wisconsin’s heavily gerrymandered legislative maps, which the U.
S.
Supreme Court had previously upheld.
Protasiewicz’s victory set the stage for a potential reversal, with progressive groups filing lawsuits immediately after her win.
Yet, conservatives argue that liberal groups the election to stack the court.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board accused activists of while The Nation countered that the election was a legitimate check on GOP gerrymandering.
# Proponents argue that electing judges ensures and reflects democratic will.
University of Wisconsin political scientist Barry Burden notes that in judicial races (turnout surged to, up from 22% in 2020) signals public interest in judicial fairness.
# Opponents, including retired Justice David Prosser, warn that.
A 2023 Pew Research study found that believe campaign donations influence court decisions.
Some legal experts, like Harvard’s Lawrence Lessig, advocate for to depoliticize the judiciary.
Wisconsin’s election is a microcosm of a national crisis:.
With cases on voting rights, climate policy, and criminal justice increasingly decided at the state level, the integrity of judicial elections is paramount.
If unchecked, the flood of dark money and partisan rhetoric risks turning courts into, undermining their role as impartial arbiters.
The 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court election was a watershed moment, but its legacy is fraught with contradictions.
While it restored balance to a conservative-dominated court, the campaign’s record spending, overt partisanship, and ethical dilemmas expose systemic flaws in judicial elections.
Without reforms such as stricter disclosure laws or public financing Wisconsin’s judiciary risks becoming another casualty of America’s polarized politics.
The question remains: Can justice prevail when judges must first win a political war? - Brennan Center for Justice (2022), - Shepherd, J.
(2021), Emory Law Journal.
- Pew Research Center (2023), - Burden, B.
(2023), UW-Madison.