Liberal Candidate Wins Wisconsin Judicial Race, Preserving Court’s Left-Leaning Majority Amid National Attention

In a judicial contest that drew widespread national interest and marked the first major statewide election of 2025, Judge Susan Crawford emerged victorious in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race, defeating conservative opponent Brad Schimel. The election outcome ensures that the Wisconsin Supreme Court will retain its current 4-3 liberal majority, setting the stage for key legal decisions on politically charged issues in the coming years.

Judge Crawford, who has served since 2018 on the Dane County Circuit Court, won the election by a comfortable nine-point margin. Her campaign emphasized support for labor rights, voting access, women’s health, and public education—issues that align with the platform of the state’s progressive camp. Her victory not only preserves the ideological balance of the court but also signals the prevailing strength of left-leaning political sentiment in this closely watched Midwestern battleground state.

The race gained significant attention far beyond Wisconsin’s borders due to its unusually high profile and historic financial spending. Billionaire businessman Elon Musk, who currently serves as an advisor to former President Donald Trump, invested approximately $20 million to support Schimel’s campaign. This infusion of funds, reportedly the largest single expenditure in the history of an American judicial race, sparked debate about the growing role of money—and particularly out-of-state money—in shaping local judicial elections.

Despite this overwhelming financial support, Schimel’s campaign was unable to overcome strong voter turnout in key Democratic-leaning areas such as Madison and Milwaukee. These urban centers provided Judge Crawford with a robust margin of victory, outweighing the more modest support Schimel received from conservative-leaning counties.

Following her win, Judge Crawford remarked, “I never could have imagined that I’d be taking on the richest man in the world, for justice in Wisconsin. And we won.” Her comments resonated with voters who viewed the race as a referendum not only on judicial philosophy, but also on the broader influence of powerful individuals and national politics on local governance.

This election comes at a pivotal time for Wisconsin, which has increasingly become a microcosm of national political trends. Over the past two decades, the state has swung back and forth between parties in both gubernatorial and presidential elections. As such, its judicial races have gained importance, with the state Supreme Court often having the final say on disputes involving election laws, district maps, labor regulations, and other pressing matters.

Looking ahead, the Wisconsin Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on several contentious issues, including potential changes to the state’s voting laws and legal challenges related to abortion policy. With the court’s ideological balance maintained, these forthcoming decisions are likely to reflect a continuation of the current progressive-leaning judicial approach.

From a broader perspective, the race is also being interpreted as a litmus test for the American electorate’s current mood ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential contest. The clear rejection of a Musk-backed candidate, in a race where the billionaire’s involvement became a central talking point, may signal growing voter skepticism about the influence of wealthy individuals on democratic institutions. This concern echoes sentiments heard across the political spectrum in recent years, as citizens express unease about the increasing intersection of money and politics.

While the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s makeup remains unchanged for now, the dynamics of the campaign—and the outsized role played by national figures and funds—are expected to influence future elections, both within the state and across the country. As such, this race may be remembered not only for its outcome, but also for the deeper questions it raised about power, influence, and the role of judicial institutions in American life.