Wisconsin Supreme Court Race Heats Up Amid Abortion Debate and Gender Controversy

The race for the Wisconsin Supreme Court has become increasingly contentious as Republican-backed candidate Brad Schimel and Democratic-backed candidate Susan Crawford compete for a seat that could tip the balance of the court. Abortion rights have emerged as a central issue in the campaign, with Schimel opposing abortion rights and Crawford supporting them. The high-stakes election, set for April 1, not only has significant implications for abortion access in Wisconsin but could also influence cases related to union rights, congressional redistricting, and election laws. The outcome of this race could serve as an early indicator of political momentum for both parties in the battleground state, following President Donald Trump’s 2024 victory in swing states, including Wisconsin.

Schimel Accuses Liberal Justices of Being Driven by Emotions

Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former Republican attorney general, sparked controversy during a November 12 radio interview on WSAU-AM. He criticized the court’s liberal majority, which consists of four women justices, accusing them of being “driven by their emotions” during oral arguments in a case challenging Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban. Schimel claimed that the justices were “on the brink of losing it” and that their tone and body language revealed a lack of objectivity. He argued that Supreme Court justices must set aside personal opinions and emotions to rule on the law impartially, implying that the liberal justices had failed to do so.

The comments were widely reported and quickly drew backlash. Crawford’s campaign described Schimel’s remarks as “disgusting insults” and part of a broader pattern of “disturbing behavior and extremism.” Schimel, however, did not back down, doubling down on his criticisms. He specifically singled out Justice Jill Karofsky, alleging that she had “lost control of her emotions” during the hearing and was “literally yelling at an attorney.” Karofsky did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Liberal Justices Fire Back, Accusing Schimel of Sexism

The four liberal justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court—Jill Karofsky, Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet, and Janet Protasiewicz—issued a joint statement condemning Schimel’s remarks as “antiquated and distorted.” They accused him of perpetuating sexist stereotypes by suggesting that women justices are overly emotional and unfit to serve. “By suggesting that women get too emotional and are unfit to serve as judges and justices, he turns back decades of progress for women,” the statement read. The justices also endorsed Crawford, framing the election as a choice between fairness and partisanship.

Conservative justices, including Rebecca Bradley and Chief Justice Annette Ziegler, defended Schimel, arguing that his comments were not sexist and that they were directed at the liberal majority’s alleged political activism. Schimel’s campaign dismissed the criticism as a “pathetic attempt to gaslight voters,” insisting that his remarks were about the court’s approach to the law, not about gender.

The High-Stakes Election and Its Implications

The Wisconsin Supreme Court race has drawn national attention due to its potential to reshape the state’s judicial landscape. The court is currently controlled by a liberal majority, but the open seat created by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley’s retirement could shift the balance if Schimel wins. The winner will serve a 10-year term, giving them significant influence over key cases that could impact abortion access, labor rights, redistricting, and election laws in Wisconsin.

Both candidates have pledged to remain impartial if elected, but their personal views on abortion rights have become a focal point of the campaign. Schimel’s opposition to abortion and Crawford’s support for abortion rights have made the race a proxy battle for broader ideological conflicts in the state. National organizations and advocacy groups, including Planned Parenthood, have weighed in on the race, further amplifying its significance.

The Broader Significance and Voter Reactions

The race has also become a test of how voters respond to controversial rhetoric and personal attacks in judicial campaigns. Schimel’s comments about the liberal justices’ emotions have sparked debates about gender bias and judicial impartiality. While Schimel’s campaign has framed his remarks as legitimate criticisms of judicial activism, Crawford’s campaign has portrayed them as evidence of Schimel’s unsuitability for the bench.

As the election approaches, both campaigns are likely to intensify their messaging, with Schimel focusing on his conservative credentials and Crawford emphasizing her commitment to protecting rights and upholding the rule of law. The outcome of the race will not only determine the direction of the Wisconsin Supreme Court but may also signal the mood of voters in a state that has been a battleground in recent elections.

Conclusion: A Race for the Future of Wisconsin’s Judiciary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court election has become a microcosm of the broader political and cultural divides in the United States. At its core, the race is a contest over the future of the judiciary and the values it represents. Schimel’s comments about the liberal justices’ emotions have added fuel to the fire, framing the race as a choice between objectivity and activism, tradition and progress. As voters head to the polls on April 1, the stakes could not be higher—not just for the future of abortion rights and judicial impartiality but for the direction of Wisconsin itself.