WISCONSIN (OnFocus) – Brad Schimel and Susan Crawford are candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the April 1, 2025, election, competing to replace retiring Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. While the race is officially nonpartisan, their backgrounds, judicial philosophies, and positions on key issues reveal distinct differences that could influence voters.
OnFocus will be breaking down what’s on the ballot on April 1 in a series of upcoming articles.
Voters can consider these differences when deciding which candidate best fits their beliefs:
Professional Background and Experience
Brad Schimel: A Waukesha County Circuit Court judge since 2019, Schimel has a long career in prosecution and law enforcement. He served as Wisconsin’s Attorney General from 2015 to 2019 and was Waukesha County District Attorney from 2006 to 2014, after working as an assistant district attorney there for over 15 years. His experience emphasizes a “tough on crime” approach, rooted in his prosecutorial roles.
Susan Crawford: A Dane County Circuit Court judge since 2018, Crawford has a varied legal background. She worked as an assistant attorney general, becoming Director of Criminal Appeals in 2000, and later served as chief legal counsel to Democratic Governor Jim Doyle. She also spent time in private practice at Pines Bach, representing clients like Planned Parenthood, and held roles in state agencies like the Department of Natural Resources. Her experience spans prosecution, government service, and advocacy for progressive causes.
Ideological Leanings and Political Support
Brad Schimel: Generally aligned with conservative values, Schimel is backed by the Republican Party of Wisconsin, conservative groups like Americans for Prosperity, and figures such as Senator Ron Johnson and former Governor Scott Walker.
Susan Crawford: Seen as a liberal candidate, Crawford is supported by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, all four current liberal Supreme Court justices (Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet, Jill Karofsky, and Janet Protasiewicz), and organizations like Planned Parenthood and the Wisconsin AFL-CIO.
Positions on Key Issues
*Abortion:
Schimel has a history of opposing abortion. As Attorney General, he supported a 2012 legal strategy to uphold Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban if Roe v. Wade were overturned and defended laws restricting abortion access, like requiring hospital admitting privileges for providers. He’s expressed personal pro-life views, shaped by adopting his daughters, but insists he’d respect the law and voters’ will as a justice.
Crawford supports abortion, having represented Planned Parenthood as a private attorney in cases challenging abortion restrictions. She avoids prejudging pending abortion cases but emphasizes protecting individual freedoms, aligning with pro-choice voters.
*Voter ID Laws:
Schimel champions Wisconsin’s voter ID law, crediting it for secure elections. He supports a ballot measure to enshrine it in the state constitution, appealing to those prioritizing election integrity.
Crawford has opposed strict voter ID requirements, calling them “draconian” in 2018 and challenging them in court in 2011 as part of a League of Women Voters lawsuit.
*Act 10 (Collective Bargaining):
Schimel supports Act 10, the 2011 law limiting public employee unions’ bargaining, which has saved taxpayers billions. His stance aligns with conservative economic priorities.
Crawford fought to overturn Act 10 as a private attorney, reflecting her support for labor and unions, a key issue for liberal and union voters.
*Crime and Sentencing:
Schimel campaigns on being tough on crime, citing his prosecutorial record. Critics note his defense of controversial cases, but he emphasizes public safety.
Crawford highlights her prosecutorial experience but has faced scrutiny for rulings perceived as lenient, such as a short sentence for a repeat child sex offender. She argues her decisions balance punishment with rehabilitation, appealing to those favoring judicial nuance.
Implications for the Court
The winner will determine whether the court retains its 4-3 liberal majority or shifts to a conservative one, impacting rulings on abortion, election laws, unions, and redistricting.
Schimel’s election could align the court with conservative priorities, while Crawford’s would preserve the liberal tilt established in 2023 with Janet Protasiewicz’s win.
Voters might choose Schimel if they prioritize law enforcement, judicial restraint, and conservative policies, or Crawford if they value abortion, labor protections, and a progressive judiciary. The decision hinges on which vision for Wisconsin’s legal future resonates more.
How to Decide
Here are questions voters in Wisconsin might ask themselves before casting their vote for either Brad Schimel or Susan Crawford in the April 1, 2025, Supreme Court election. These questions are designed to reflect the candidates’ differences and help voters align their priorities with their choice:
How do I feel about abortion and the court’s role in protecting or limiting them?
Consider whether you support Schimel’s pro-life stance and his past efforts to uphold abortion restrictions, or Crawford’s advocacy for abortion through her work with Planned Parenthood.
What’s more important to me: strict election security or broader voting access?
Reflect on whether you align with Schimel’s defense of voter ID laws and election integrity measures, or Crawford’s opposition to such requirements and her push for broader voting access.
How do I view public safety and criminal justice—tougher sentences or a balanced approach?
Think about whether Schimel’s “tough on crime” prosecutorial background appeals to your sense of safety, or if Crawford’s record of blending punishment with rehabilitation better matches your values.
Should the court lean conservative or liberal on issues like unions and redistricting?
Ask yourself if you’d prefer Schimel’s conservative tilt, which could shift the court’s 4-3 liberal majority and support policies like Act 10, or Crawford’s liberal alignment, preserving the current balance.
Implication of WI Supreme Court Race
The race between Brad Schimel and Susan Crawford for the Wisconsin Supreme Court on April 1, 2025, is critically important because it will determine the ideological balance of the court, which has far-reaching implications for the state’s laws, policies, and political landscape.
Here’s why it matters:
1. Control of the Court’s Majority
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court currently has a 4-3 liberal majority, secured in 2023 with Justice Janet Protasiewicz’s election. This race to replace retiring liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley will decide whether that majority holds or flips to a 3-4 conservative majority. The winning candidate’s ideology—Schimel’s conservatism or Crawford’s liberalism—will tip the scales for at least the next decade, given justices serve 10-year terms.
2. Impact on Abortion Laws
The court is likely to rule on the legality of Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban, revived after Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022. A liberal majority with Crawford could strike it down or limit its enforcement, preserving abortion access. A conservative majority with Schimel might uphold it or defer to legislative restrictions, aligning with his pro-life record.
3. Election Integrity and Voting Rights
Wisconsin, a perennial swing state, often sees close elections (e.g., Trump’s 2016 win by 22,000 votes). The court has jurisdiction over voting laws, including voter ID requirements, drop box usage, and ballot deadlines—issues already contested in recent cases. Schimel’s support for strict election security could favor Republican-backed measures, while Crawford’s push for voting access might benefit Democratic priorities, shaping how future elections are conducted and certified.
4. Redistricting and Political Power
The court’s liberal majority redrew Wisconsin’s legislative maps in 2023, shifting them from heavily gerrymandered Republican advantages to more competitive districts. A conservative shift with Schimel could reopen map disputes or uphold GOP-friendly boundaries in future challenges, locking in political control. Crawford’s win would likely maintain or expand the current balance, affecting which party dominates the state legislature.
Why It’s a Big Deal Now
The court’s recent liberal shift ended over a decade of conservative dominance, making this a rare chance to either solidify or reverse that change. With issues like abortion and election rules already in the pipeline (e.g., a pending Planned Parenthood lawsuit), the next justice will cast decisive votes.
In short, this race isn’t just about one seat; it’s about who controls Wisconsin’s legal and political future. Whether voters prioritize conservative stability or liberal progress, the outcome will ripple through the state and nation for years.
Vote for the candidate—Brad Schimel or Susan Crawford—whose stance on key issues like abortion, voting rights, and judicial philosophy best aligns with your vision for Wisconsin’s future.
We welcome your stories! Contact us at [email protected]!
Author: News Desk
This piece was posted by our news team! Contact us or submit stories at [email protected].
