Blogs
Mardul Sharma

Author

  • Published: Apr 02 2025 10:06 AM
  • Last Updated: May 29 2025 07:58 PM

The 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court election, a record-breaking $100 million race, saw liberal Susan Crawford defeat conservative Brad Schimel, fueled by Elon Musk's controversial investment, impacting abortion and voting rights.


Newsletter

wave

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Election: A Wild Ride

Okay, so you remember the Wisconsin Supreme Court election on April 1st, 2025? It wasn’t your typical state-level race. No sir, this thing became a total national showdown, a crazy referendum on everything from Trump and Musk to the very soul of American politics. The stakes? Control of the court, impacting everything from abortion access to – get this – how they draw electoral maps. And the price tag? A record-breaking, almost-$100 million, making it the most expensive judicial race in US history. Honestly, who saw that coming?

The Candidates: A Clash of Titans

On one side, we had Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and a Trump endorsee – the ultimate conservative. On the other, Susan Crawford, a Dane County judge representing the liberal side. Both candidates raked in serious cash. Schimel got a whopping $21 million, thanks largely to Elon Musk and his allies. Crawford, meanwhile, secured support from some pretty big names in the Democratic donor world. The whole thing felt like a heavyweight boxing match – whoever won would swing the court's balance to either a 4-3 conservative or a 4-3 liberal majority.

Musk's Mega-Millions: A Controversial Move

Elon Musk's involvement? That's where things got *really* interesting. His massive investment, including a controversial million-dollar check giveaway, sparked a firestorm. Critics screamed about him "buying" the election, while his supporters saw it as a necessary counter to "activist judges." It was a huge debate, and the sheer amount of outside money pouring into this state-level race really highlighted just how much the national spotlight was on it. It kinda felt like watching a slow-motion trainwreck.

The Verdict: A Liberal Victory

And the winner is…Susan Crawford! Democrats celebrated it as a major win, a rejection of Musk's influence and a sign that voters weren't going to roll over for big-money interference. Republicans, though, pointed to the passage of a voter ID constitutional amendment as a sign that their side still held significant power. It was a mixed bag, really. A complex outcome to a complex election.

What It All Means: More Than Just a Court Case

This election? It's a huge snapshot of where we are politically. It’s a big early indicator of public sentiment towards Trump and his policies, and it gave us a serious lesson on the power (and potential pitfalls) of massive outside spending in elections. The outcome will directly impact huge legal battles in Wisconsin over abortion, voting rights, and redistricting – all with potential ripples across the country. It’s a story that's far from over.

FAQ

Liberal candidate Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel in a closely contested race. The election was notable for its record-breaking spending and the significant role of outside funding.

A staggering $100 million was spent in the 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court election, making it one of the most expensive state judicial races in US history. This huge sum highlights the increasing influence of money in judicial elections.

Elon Musk's controversial investment significantly impacted the race, providing substantial funding that influenced the outcome. The source and nature of his contribution generated considerable debate.

The outcome of the election is expected to have significant consequences for abortion access and voting rights in Wisconsin. Susan Crawford's victory is likely to lead to a more liberal approach on these issues.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court race garnered national attention due to the high stakes, record-breaking spending, and involvement of prominent figures like Elon Musk and the perceived shadow of Donald Trump. It serves as a case study of the increasing politicization of judicial elections.

Search Anything...!