(The Badger Project) — Wisconsin is in the midst of yet another exorbitantly expensive political race, with record-breaking amounts of cash flooding in to try and influence who will win a seat on the state’s Supreme Court. The race could see $100 million in spending, which would set a new record for the court. It attracted more than $50 million in spending the last time it had a race in 2023, setting the current record.
But don’t think you’ll get a break after this one. The Wisconsin Supreme Court will have an election in each of the next four years.
That is likely to mean a one-upping, record-breaking amount of spending every election, said Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks political spending in the state. And an ever-increasing load of political attack ads.
It could also mean more flip-flopping on the state’s highest court, one that has already reversed itself on some major decisions after its ideological majority changed recently.
The court’s majority
The Wisconsin Supreme Court currently has a 4-3 left-leaning majority, thanks to Democrats flipping a seat there in 2023.
That makes the 2025 election another pivotal one, as a left-leaning justice is retiring, giving Republicans the chance to flip it back.
The race and the court are both technically nonpartisan, though both parties and partisans dump cash into the races to help their preferred candidate win.
Should Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, the right-leaning candidate, win, conservatives will take back control of the court’s majority. Then the election in 2026 will be yet another high-stakes race for control, as the political left will badly want to flip it back again.
But in 2026 and 2027, Republicans will have to defend conservative-held seats on the court, as Rebecca Bradley and Annette Kingsland Ziegler are both up for reelection.
So a win by the left-leaning candidate Dane County Judge Susan Crawford this year will likely keep the court in the hands of the political left until, at the earliest, they have to defend a seat they currently hold in 2028.
That scenario may change the temperature of following elections for the court, said Chad Oldfather, a professor at the Marquette University School of Law.
“Not as high stakes in the short term, and perhaps not quite as likely to draw as much outside money and attention, but potentially significant just the same,” he continued.
Flipping the majority to flipping decisions
In recent years, the court had affirmed some major Republican desires, including protecting much of the GOP’s redistricting plans, and banning ballot boxes. When the left flipped the court in 2023 for the first time in years, the new liberal majority overturned those decisions.
It is entirely possible that we will see the court reverse itself on more high-profile issues, said Robert Yablon, a professor at the UW-Madison Law School.
“That said, even if the court’s balance shifts, principles of stare decisis might deter the justices from revisiting at least some precedents,” he continued. “Stare decisis encourages courts to respect prior rulings and not overrule them simply because they disagree with the result.”
Flipping repeatedly on legal issues can be disruptive to those affected and can undermine a court’s credibility, Yablon noted.
“That’s part of the reason why the doctrine of stare decisis exists,” he said.
Appointing justices instead?
The tens of millions of dollars raining into the state to flood the airwaves and mailboxes with political ads have some thinking of other ways to select justices for the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
One idea is to change the state’s constitution and move to a system in which all Wisconsin judges, or at least state Supreme Court justices, are appointed rather than elected.
Making changes to the state constitution is difficult. They require the state Legislature to pass an amendment proposal in two consecutive sessions. Then it goes to the public, where voters must approve the amendment.
The goal of a move like that could be to make the court less political, said Aaron Weinschenk, a political science professor at UW-Green Bay.
“But it may not have that effect, as approval by a legislature or governor could get pretty heated too,” he continued. “You could certainly imagine a legislative chamber being pretty divided, or, if a governor appointment needed legislative approval, there being disagreement depending on party control.”
One only needs to recall the intensity around U.S. Supreme Court appointments in the U.S. Senate.
Curbing political cash
Billionaires and millionaires from around the country are dumping money into the race this year, giving huge donations directly to the candidates, to the political parties, and to super PACs, which raise and spend independently of campaigns and parties.
Curbing the raising and spending of super PACs may be a multi-year project, one that would need either the approval of the U.S. Supreme Court or a change in the ideological majority there, but a path exists for Wisconsin to reduce some of the spending in its political races.
See also: Billionaires From Both Sides Flooding Wisconsin Supreme Court Race With Cash
While state law caps the maximum any one person can give to a political candidate, a loophole in the law allows political parties, like super PACs, to raise unlimited amounts of cash and then distribute it to candidates. The Wisconsin State Legislature could enact maximum limits to state political parties the way it does for candidates. Republicans who have controlled the state Legislature for years now have been uninterested in this reform, but Democrats reclaiming the majority in 2026 may change things.
The Badger Project is a nonpartisan, citizen-supported journalism nonprofit in Wisconsin.
Last Update: Mar 19, 2025 9:07 am CDT
