Wisconsin Supreme Court
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, once a relatively obscure judicial body, has become a battleground for ideological and political warfare.
Comprising seven justices elected to ten-year terms, the court has seen escalating partisanship, record-breaking campaign spending, and controversial rulings on voting rights, redistricting, and abortion.
This shift reflects broader national trends but is amplified by Wisconsin’s status as a perennial swing state.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s legitimacy is increasingly undermined by hyper-partisan elections, corporate influence, and rulings that prioritize political expediency over judicial impartiality raising urgent questions about the erosion of public trust in state judiciaries.
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court elections have morphed into multi-million-dollar proxy wars.
The 2023 race between Janet Protasiewicz and Dan Kelly shattered spending records, exceeding $45 million more than some U.
S.
Senate races (Brennan Center for Justice, 2023).
Over 80% of TV ad spending came from outside groups, including the conservative Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce and liberal advocacy organizations (Wisconsin Democracy Campaign).
Critics argue such spending creates conflicts of interest.
A 2022 study in the found that justices are more likely to rule favorably for their major donors.
In *Wisconsin Prosperity Network v.
Myse The court’s 4-3 liberal majority, cemented by Protasiewicz’s election, has reignited debates over judicial activism.
In December 2023, the court overturned Wisconsin’s GOP-drawn legislative maps, ruling they violated the state constitution’s “contiguity” requirement ().
Conservatives accused the majority of partisan overreach, while progressives hailed it as a corrective to extreme gerrymandering.
This mirrors the U.
S.
Supreme Court’s (2019), which declared federal courts powerless to stop partisan gerrymandering.
Wisconsin’s case underscores how state courts are now the last recourse for voting rights advocates but also how their decisions are viewed through a partisan lens.
The court’s pending review of Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban () highlights tensions over judicial philosophy.
Conservative justices, echoing U.
S.
Supreme Court originalists, argue the law’s text is clear.
Liberals counter that modern constitutional interpretation must account for societal change.
Legal historian David Schleicher notes that Wisconsin’s constitution has unusually broad “right to life” language, making the case a litmus test for how state courts balance historical intent with contemporary values.
The ruling could either entrench Wisconsin’s abortion ban or trigger a constitutional crisis with the GOP-controlled legislature.
A 2023 Marquette Law School poll found only 38% of Wisconsinites trust the Supreme Court down from 59% in 2019.
This decline parallels the U.
S.
Supreme Court’s credibility crisis but is exacerbated by Wisconsin’s unique electoral system.
Some scholars, like Harvard’s Maya Sen, advocate for merit-based appointments to depoliticize the court.
Others warn that eliminating elections could further alienate voters.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s struggles reflect a judiciary increasingly viewed as an extension of partisan politics.
From dark money to ideological rulings, the court’s crises are microcosms of broader democratic erosion.
While its new liberal majority may reverse past conservative rulings, the deeper issue loss of judicial neutrality remains unresolved.
Without structural reforms, including stricter recusal rules and campaign finance limits, the court risks becoming another casualty in America’s escalating governance crisis.
~4,800 characters - Brennan Center for Justice (2023).
- Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.
- American Journal of Political Science (2022).
- Marquette Law School Poll (2023).