Wisconsin voters will decide today the political bent of their state supreme court. But more could rest on the outcome of the election than whether the “non-partisan” court remains liberal or flips to conservative control. Badger State voters may well hold the fate of the US House of Representatives in their hands.
‘Non-Partisan’ Court Is Just Playing Political Pretend
The Wisconsin Supreme Court is officially non-partisan – but that doesn’t mean the judges don’t have their own backgrounds and political leanings. At present, there are four liberals to three conservatives on the state’s top court. The candidate who wins today, Tuesday, April 1, will replace a liberal judge for a ten-year term. The outcome will determine whether the court maintains a clear majority and leftist bent for the foreseeable future. Perhaps more importantly, on the national level, it could also decide the fate of two seats in the US House of Representatives in the coming midterms of 2026.
Both candidates are already judges, but each has a broader political background, as well. Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel formerly served as the Wisconsin attorney general. Dane County Judge Susan Crawford was once an assistant state attorney general and the chief legal counsel for a former governor.
It’s these non-judicial political backgrounds that put the lie to their current “non-partisan” designations. Schimel was listed as a Republican during his time as AG, and he has been officially endorsed by President Donald Trump. Crawford was listed as a Democrat as assistant AG, advised a Democratic governor, Jim Doyle, as an attorney, and has recently been endorsed by former President Barack Obama. As well, Republican donors are shelling out big bucks for Schimel, and Democratic donors are doing the same for Crawford. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) even called her a “strong Democratic candidate” during a DNC update Monday, March 31.
There have also been some big-name and big-dollar donations. Elon Musk and George Soros have each shelled out millions for their respective chosen judges – and they aren’t alone. All told, around $90 million has been on this election, making it the most expensive state supreme court election in American history. In fact, only a few US Senate campaigns cost as much or more. So, why the big bucks and national attention? In this particular case, the map may, in fact, be the territory.
Today Wisconsin, Tomorrow the Nation?
The source of all the national attention – and the political intrigue – is a strategic briefing held in January, during which a plan was revealed. This particular event was just one of many partisan shindigs that have taken place on both sides of the so-called non-partisan election. But this one, specifically, was held by Democratic Party donors and was advertised in the invitation emails as a “chance to put two more House seats in play for 2026.”
The plan discussed during the call – which Susan Crawford did attend at least briefly – is, should she win, for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to shortly thereafter force new congressional maps to be drawn targeting the First and Third Districts, held respectively by Reps. Bryan Steil and Derrick Van Orden, both Republicans.
The GOP caught wind of this and ran with it, presenting Crawford’s involvement as meaning she’s in on the plot and intends to play her part. “Susan Crawford has proven she will do anything in her pursuit of power, even offer congressional seats for support of her campaign,” said a statement released by the Schimel campaign. “In an appeal to entice out-of-state billionaires, Susan Crawford said the quite part out loud: she is begging to be bought and paid for,” Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Brian Schimming said in a statement of his own.
Crawford’s campaign spokesperson, Derrick Honeyman, refuted this, however. He released a statement saying that she is running to be a “fair, impartial, and common sense justice.” He continued: “She has not publicly or privately commented on congressional redistricting at any time and was on this call briefly to share her background and why she’s running.”
Still, she was on a call – with major donors from the Democratic Party – that anyone who read the email invite would know was intended to strategize about redistricting should Crawford win. And Rep. Jeffries’ endorsement – that she’s a “strong Democratic candidate” – probably hurt more than help the non-partisan image. That doesn’t seem to have hurt her chances, however. According to RealClear Polling, Crawford was up anywhere from plus five to plus eight – with just one tie – in the top seven surveys in March.
Running the Numbers
At present, Republicans hold a 218 – 213 majority, and there are four vacancies. Even if Democrats fill all four vacancies, the GOP would still lead 218-217, but winning any or all of those seats would certainly expand the Republican majority and make passing partisan legislation much easier. Two of those vacancies will be addressed directly today as well, through special elections in Florida. Both are in districts that have been reliably red and backed Trump in the 2024 election – 65% for the Sixth District and 68% for the First. They aren’t guaranteed wins for Republicans, but they’re certainly leaning that direction.
Still, if Crawford wins today in Wisconsin, it seems there’s a plan in place – whether she’s committed to it or not – to redraw the congressional lines so that, come Election Day 2026, those two currently red Wisconsin seats flip blue. And with the GOP majority as slim as it is, it’s no wonder big-name billionaires and the national media have suddenly noticed America’s Dairyland.
