The Democratic-backed candidate for Wisconsin Supreme Court defeated a challenger endorsed by President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk on Tuesday, cementing a liberal majority for at least three more years.

Susan Crawford, a Dane County judge who led legal fights to protect union power and abortion rights and to oppose voter ID, defeated Republican-backed Brad Schimel in a race that broke records for spending, was on pace to be the highest-turnout Wisconsin Supreme Court election ever and became a proxy fight for the nation’s political battles.

Trump, Musk and other Republicans lined up behind Schimel, a former state attorney general. Democrats including former President Barack Obama and billionaire megadonor George Soros backed Crawford.

The first major election in the country since November was seen as a litmus test of how voters feel about Trump’s first months back in office and the role played by Musk, whose Department of Government Efficiency has torn through federal agencies and laid off thousands of workers. Musk traveled to Wisconsin on Sunday to make a pitch for Schimel and personally hand out $1 million checks to voters.

Crawford embraced the backing of Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights advocates, running ads that highlighted Schimel’s opposition to the procedure. She also attacked Schimel for his ties to Musk and Republicans, referring to Musk as “Elon Schimel” during a debate.

Schimel’s campaign tried to portray Crawford as weak on crime and a puppet of Democrats who, if elected, would push to redraw congressional district boundary lines to hurt Republicans and repeal a GOP-backed state law that took collective bargaining rights away from most public workers.

Crawford’s win keeps the court under a 4-3 liberal majority, as it has been since 2023. A liberal justice is not up for election again until April 2028, ensuring liberals will either maintain or increase their hold on the court until then. The two most conservative justices are up for re-election in 2026 and 2027.

The court likely will be deciding cases on abortion, public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries. Who controls the court also could factor into how it might rule on any future voting challenge in the perennial presidential battleground state, which raised the stakes of the race for national Republicans and Democrats.

Musk and groups he funded poured more than $21 million into the contest. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, campaigned for Schimel in the closing weeks and said electing him was essential to protecting the Republican agenda. Trump endorsed Schimel just 11 days before the election.

Schimel, who leaned into his Trump endorsement in the closing days of the race, said he would not be beholden to the president or Musk despite the massive spending on the race by groups that Musk supports.

Crawford benefitted from campaign stops by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the vice presidential nominee last year, and money from billionaire megadonors including Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.

The contest was the most expensive court race on record in the U.S., with spending nearing $99 million, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice. That broke the previous record of $51 million for the state’s Supreme Court race in 2023.

All of the spending and attention on the race led to high early voting turnout, with numbers more than 50% higher than the state’s Supreme Court race two years ago.

Crawford was elected to a 10-year term replacing liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, who is retiring after 30 years on the bench.

Wisconsin enshrines voter ID in state constitution

Wisconsin’s photo ID requirement for voting will be elevated from state law to constitutional amendment under a proposal approved by voters.

The Republican-controlled Legislature placed the measure on the ballot and pitched it as a way to bolster election security and protect the law from being overturned in court.

Democratic opponents argued that photo ID requirements are often enforced unfairly, making voting more difficult for people of color, disabled people and poor people.

Wisconsin voters won’t notice any changes when they go to the polls. They will still have to present a valid photo ID just as they have under the state law, which was passed in 2011 and went into effect permanently in 2016 after a series of unsuccessful lawsuits.

Placing the photo ID requirement in the constitution makes it more difficult for a future Legislature controlled by Democrats to change the law. Any constitutional amendment must be approved in two consecutive legislative sessions and by a statewide popular vote.

Republican legislators celebrated the measure’s passage.

“This will help maintain integrity in the electoral process, no matter who controls the Legislature,” Sen. Van Wanggaard, who co-authored the amendment, said in a statement.

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who is leading Trump’s efforts to shrink the federal government, also noted the outcome on his social media platform, X, saying: “Yeah!”

Wisconsin is one of nine states where people must present photo ID to vote, and its requirement is the nation’s strictest, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Thirty-six states have laws requiring or requesting that voters show some sort of identification, according to the NCSL.

State schools chief Jill Underly wins reelection over GOP-backed rival

Jill Underly, the Democratic-backed state education chief, defeated her Republican-aligned opponent, Brittany Kinser.

Underly will guide policies affecting K-12 schools as Trump moves to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education. Her second term comes at a time when test scores are still recovering from the pandemic, Wisconsin’s achievement gap between white and Black students remains the worst in the country and more schools are asking voters to raise property taxes to pay for operations.

Wisconsin is the only state where voters elect the top education official but there is no state board of education. That gives the superintendent broad authority to oversee education policy, from disbursing school funding to managing teacher licensing.

Underly, 47, had the support of the teachers union in the general election after failing to secure it in the three-person primary. She also was backed financially by the state Democratic Party.

Underly, who was first elected as state superintendent in 2021, ran as a champion of public schools. Kinser is a supporter of the private school voucher program.

Underly’s education career began in 1999 as a high school social studies teacher in Indiana. She moved to Wisconsin in 2005 and worked for five years at the state education department. She also was principal of Pecatonica Elementary School for a year before becoming district administrator.

Kinser, whose backers included the Wisconsin Republican Party and former Republican Govs. Tommy Thompson and Scott Walker, previously worked for Rocketship schools, part of a national network of public charter institutions. She rose to become its executive director in the Milwaukee region.

In 2022 she left Rocketship for City Forward Collective, a Milwaukee nonprofit that advocates for charter and voucher schools. She also founded a consulting firm where she currently works.

Kinser tried to brand Underly as being a poor manager of the Department of Public Instruction and keyed in on her overhaul of state achievement standards last year.

Underly said that was done to better reflect what students are learning now, but the change was met with bipartisan opposition including from Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who was previously state superintendent himself. Evers did not make an endorsement in the race.

High turnout leads to ballot shortage in Milwaukee

Unprecedented turnout led to ballot shortages in Wisconsin’s largest city Tuesday as voters cast ballots in “historic” numbers.

The race for control of the court, which became a proxy battle for the nation’s political fights, broke records for spending and was poised to be the highest-turnout Wisconsin Supreme Court election ever.

Early voting was more than 50% ahead of levels seen in the state’s Supreme Court race two years ago, when majority control was also at stake.

Seven polling sites in Milwaukee ran out of ballots, or were nearly out, due to “historic turnout” and more ballots were on their way before polls closed, said Paulina Gutierrez, the executive director of the Milwaukee Election Commission.

Clerks all across the state, including in the city’s deep-red suburbs, reported turnout far exceeding 2023 levels.

A state race with nationwide significance

The court can decide election-related laws and settle disputes over future election outcomes.

“Wisconsin’s a big state politically, and the Supreme Court has a lot to do with elections in Wisconsin,” Trump said Monday. “Winning Wisconsin’s a big deal, so therefore the Supreme Court choice … it’s a big race.”

Crawford embraced the backing of Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights advocates, running ads that highlighted Schimel’s opposition to the procedure. She also attacked Schimel for his ties to Musk and Trump, who endorsed Schimel 11 days before the election.

Schimel’s campaign tried to portray Crawford as weak on crime and a puppet of Democrats who would push to redraw congressional district boundary lines to hurt Republicans and repeal a GOP-backed state law that took collective bargaining rights away from most public workers.

Voters in Eau Claire seemed to be responding to both messages. Jim Seeger, a 68-year-old retiree, said he voted for Schimel because he’s concerned about redistricting.

Jim Hazelton, a 68-year-old disabled veteran, said he had planned to abstain but voted for Crawford after Musk — whom he described as a “pushy billionaire” — and Trump got involved.

“He’s cutting everything,” Hazelton said of Musk. “People need these things he’s cutting.”

What’s on the court’s agenda?

The court will likely be deciding cases on abortion, public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries.

Last year the court declined to take up a Democratic-backed challenge to congressional lines, but Schimel and Musk said that if Crawford wins, the court will redraw congressional districts to make them more favorable to Democrats. Currently Republicans control six out of eight seats in an evenly divided state.

Musk was pushing that message on Election Day, both on TV and the social media platform he owns, X, urging people to cast ballots in the final hours of voting.

There were no major voting issues by midday Tuesday, state election officials said. Severe weather prompted the relocation of some polling places in northern Wisconsin, and some polling places in Green Bay briefly lost power but voting continued. In Dane County, home to the state capital, Madison, election officials said polling locations were busy and operating normally.

Record-breaking donations

The contest is the most expensive court race on record in the U.S., with spending nearing $99 million, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice.

Musk contributed $3 million to the campaign, while groups he funded poured in another $18 million. Musk also gave $1 million each to three voters who signed a petition he circulated against “activist” judges.

Schimel leaned into his support from Trump while saying he would not be beholden to the president or Musk. Democrats centered their messaging on the spending by Musk-funded groups.

“Ultimately I think it’s going to help Susan Crawford, because people do not want to see Elon Musk buying election after election after election,” Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler said Monday. “If it works here, he’s going to do it all over the country.”

Democratic-backed Susan Crawford wins Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, cementing liberal majority is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Billionaire Elon Musk says a Wisconsin voter has been awarded $1 million days before the conclusion of a fiercely contested state Supreme Court election that has broken spending records and become a referendum on Musk and the first months of President Donald Trump’s administration.

The payment to a Green Bay man, which Musk announced Wednesday night on his social media platform X, is similar to a lottery that Musk’s political action committee ran last year in Wisconsin and other battleground states before the presidential election in November.

The upcoming election on Tuesday, filling a seat held by a liberal justice who is retiring, will determine whether Wisconsin’s highest court will remain under 4-3 liberal control or flip to a conservative majority. The race has become a proxy battle over the nation’s politics, with Trump and Musk getting behind Brad Schimel, the Republican-backed candidate in the officially nonpartisan contest.

The campaign for the Democratic-supported candidate, Susan Crawford, blasted the $1 million payment from Musk as an attempt to illegally buy influence on the court in a state where Tesla, his electric car company, has a lawsuit pending that could end up before the court.

“It’s corrupt, it’s extreme, and it’s disgraceful to our state and judiciary,” Crawford spokesperson Derrick Honeyman said in a statement.

No legal action against Musk’s payments to voters has been filed in Wisconsin with the Supreme Court election five days away.

Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, said the payments were a last-minute attempt to influence the election.

“Whether or not Wisconsinites will believe this is legitimate or not probably won’t be settled until after the election,” he said. “But this is not what a Wisconsin Supreme Court election ought to be decided on. Races for the high court are supposed to be on judicial temperament and impartiality, not huge amounts of money for partisan purposes.”

Musk’s political action committee, America First, announced last week that it was offering $100 to voters who signed a petition in opposition to “activist judges.” He did not say there would be $1 million prizes at that time, but in his post on Wednesday said an additional $1 million award would be made in two days.

It was not clear who determined the winner of the $1 million or how it was done.

Musk’s political action committee used a nearly identical tactic before the White House election last year, offering to pay $1 million a day to voters in Wisconsin and six other battleground states who signed a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments.

It is a felony in Wisconsin to offer, give, lend or promise to lend or give anything of value to induce a voter to cast a ballot or not vote.

The Musk petition says it is open only to registered Wisconsin voters, but those who sign it are not required to show any proof that they actually voted.

The petition says: “Judges should interpret laws as written, not rewrite them to fit their personal or political agendas. By signing below, I’m rejecting the actions of activist judges who impose their own views and demanding a judiciary that respects its role — interpreting, not legislating.”

The petition, while designed to collect data on Wisconsin voters and energize them, also is in line with Trump’s agenda alleging that “activist” judges are illegally working against him. Trump’s administration is embroiled in several lawsuits related to his flurry of executive orders and Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency effort to downsize the federal bureaucracy.

During last year’s presidential race, Philadelphia’s district attorney sued in an attempt to stop the payments under Pennsylvania law. But a judge said prosecutors failed to show the effort was an illegal lottery and allowed it to continue through Election Day.

America PAC and Building for America’s Future, two groups that Musk funds, have spent more than $17 million trying to help elect Schimel, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice. Musk also has given the Wisconsin Republican Party $3 million this year, which it can then give to Schimel or spend on the race.

More than $81 million has been spent on the race so far, obliterating the record for a judicial race in the U.S. of $51 million set in Wisconsin just two years ago, according to Brennan Center tallies.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Elon Musk announces $1 million for Wisconsin voter in Supreme Court race. Opposition calls it ‘corrupt’ is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A group funded by billionaire Elon Musk is offering Wisconsin voters $100 to sign a petition in opposition to “activist judges,” a move that comes two weeks before the state’s Supreme Court election and after the political action committee made a similar proposal last year in battleground states.

Musk’s political action committee America PAC announced the petition in a post on X on Thursday night. It promises $100 for each Wisconsin voter who signs the petition and another $100 for each signer the voter refers.

The campaign for Susan Crawford, the Democratic-backed candidate for Wisconsin Supreme Court, said Musk was trying to buy votes ahead of the April 1 election. The offer was made two days after early voting started in the hotly contested race between Crawford and Brad Schimel, the preferred candidate of Musk and Republicans.

The winner of the election will determine whether the court remains under liberal control or flips to a conservative majority.

Musk’s PAC used a nearly identical tactic ahead of the November presidential election, offering to pay $1 million a day to voters in Wisconsin and six other battleground states who signed a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments.

Philadelphia’s district attorney sued in an attempt to stop the payments under Pennsylvania law. But a judge said that prosecutors failed to show that the effort was an illegal lottery, and it was allowed to continue through Election Day.

America PAC and Building for America’s Future, two groups Musk funds, have spent more than $13 million trying to help elect Schimel, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice. The winner will determine whether conservative or liberal justices control the court, with key battles looming over abortion, public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries.

Crawford campaign spokesperson Derrick Honeyman accused Musk of “trying to buy a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court to secure a favorable ruling in his company’s lawsuit against the state.”

Just days before Musk’s groups started spending on the Supreme Court race, electric car manufacturer Tesla sued Wisconsin over its decision to not allow it to open dealerships. Musk is the CEO of Tesla and also the head of rocket ship manufacturer SpaceX. Tesla’s case could ultimately come before the Supreme Court.

“Very important to vote Republican for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to prevent voting fraud,” Musk posted on X, just eight days before the lawsuit was filed in January.

Andrew Romeo, a spokesperson for America PAC, referred to the post on X announcing the petition when asked for comment on Friday. A spokesperson for Schimel’s campaign did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

Crawford and her allies have made linking Schimel with Musk a key plank of their campaign. The Wisconsin Democratic Party released a new ad this week accusing Musk of trying to buy the seat for Schimel, a close ally of President Donald Trump.

Schimel earlier this week campaigned with Donald Trump Jr. at an event where the president’s son said electing Schimel was essential for protecting Trump’s agenda. America PAC has also been making that argument in flyers it’s handing out to Wisconsin voters.

Musk’s other group, Building America’s Future, said in a memo Thursday that to defeat Crawford it must “present Schimel as a pro-Trump conservative.”

The new petition says: “Judges should interpret laws as written, not rewrite them to fit their personal or political agendas. By signing below, I’m rejecting the actions of activist judges who impose their own views and demanding a judiciary that respects its role — interpreting, not legislating.”

The petition, while designed to collect data on Wisconsin voters and energize them, is also in line with Trump’s agenda alleging that “activist” judges are illegally working against him. Trump’s administration is embroiled in several lawsuits related to Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency effort to downsize the federal bureaucracy.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Elon Musk group offers $100 to Wisconsin voters to sign petition against ‘activist judges’ is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Republican-backed candidate in Wisconsin’s closely watched state Supreme Court race has resurfaced long-debunked concerns about voting fraud because of the late reporting of ballots in Milwaukee just two weeks before the April 1 election.

Brad Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, spoke of the possibility of “bags of ballots” and fraud in Milwaukee during an interview Tuesday on conservative talk radio. Schimel faces Democratic-backed Susan Crawford in the April 1 election with majority control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court at stake.

Schimel, in an interview on WISN-AM, said his supporters need to “get our votes banked, make this too big to rig so we don’t have to worry that at 11:30 in Milwaukee, they’re going to find bags of ballots that they forgot to put into the machines.”

Schimel said that happened in 2018 and in November “when (U.S. Senate candidate) Eric Hovde was ahead all night, and then all of a sudden, Milwaukee County changed that.”

Republicans and Democrats alike, along with state and Milwaukee election leaders, warned in the run-up to the November election that Milwaukee absentee ballots would be reported late and cause a huge influx of Democratic votes. Milwaukee is the state’s most populated city and is heavily Democratic. Its chief elections official was chosen with bipartisan support.

The reporting of those absentee ballots swung the 2020 presidential election to Democrat Joe Biden, fueling baseless conspiracy theories that the election had been stolen from President Donald Trump.

Milwaukee’s absentee ballots are counted at a central location and reported all at once, often well after midnight on Election Day. Elections officials for years have made clear that those ballots are reported later than usual due to the sheer number that have to be counted and because state law does not allow them to be processed until polls open.

A bipartisan bill to allow for processing prior to Election Day died in the Republican-controlled Senate last year. Republicans, who have controlled the Legislature since 2011, routinely complain about slow processing in Milwaukee but have not passed bills to allow for speedier counting.

In 2018, the reporting of more than 47,000 absentee ballots after midnight put Democrat Tony Evers ahead of then-Gov. Scott Walker. Evers went on to win, and Walker criticized the late reporting, saying it blindsided him.

And in November, Hovde said he was “shocked” by the reporting of more than 108,000 ballots in Milwaukee early in the morning after the election in his defeat to Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin.

Schimel said in the radio interview he didn’t know what happened.

“I don’t know if there was fraud there,” Schimel said. “There’s no way for me to know that. All I know is this: We need to turn our votes out. That’s the best insulation we have against any potential fraud, is just get our people to the polls.”

Asked about his concerns during an appearance later Tuesday at the Milwaukee Rotary Club, Schimel said he brought up fraud because voters often ask him how to guarantee election integrity.

“I tell people, by following the rules,” Schimel said. “And then I tell them, ‘Here’s the best way to make sure your vote isn’t stolen: Go use it.’ That’s the answer.”

Yet despite his concerns, Schimel said: “I will always accept the results of the election.”

Crawford’s spokesperson, Derrick Honeyman, said Schimel was “dabbling in conspiracy theories to please his ally, Elon Musk, and it’s unbecoming of a judge and candidate for the state’s high court.”

Groups funded by billionaire Musk have contributed more than $11 million to help Schimel’s campaign. Crawford is backed by several billionaire Democrats, including philanthropist George Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.

Schimel’s comments drew criticism from the Democracy Defense Project, a bipartisan coalition promoting truth about elections that includes former Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen.

“There is no evidence of fraud in Milwaukee, but the failure of the state to allow early counting on absentee ballots before the close of polls feeds into conspiracy theories,” the group said in a statement.

The election comes as the court faces cases on abortion, public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries.

The court is currently controlled 4-3 by liberals, but one of them is retiring, creating the battle for the majority.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel resurfaces debunked voting fraud concerns is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Abortion rights and the influence of donations from billionaires Elon Musk and George Soros took center stage in a sometimes testy debate Wednesday between candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court less than three weeks before the election.

The winner of the April 1 contest will determine whether conservative or liberal justices control Wisconsin’s highest court as it faces cases over abortion and reproductive rights, the strength of public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries.

The race could be a litmus test early in President Donald Trump’s term in a key presidential swing state.

The race pits Republican-backed Waukesha County Circuit Judge Brad Schimel, a former attorney general, against Democratic-backed Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford.

Here are highlights from the debate:

Abortion rights

A challenge to an 1849 state law that bans nearly all abortions is currently pending before the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Schimel, who is supported by anti-abortion groups, said he believes the 1849 ban “was a validly passed law. I don’t believe it reflects the will of the people of Wisconsin today.”

Schimel said the future of abortion rights should not be up to the Supreme Court, but should instead be decided by voters.

Crawford declined to take a position on the pending abortion case.

But she said she was proud to have supported Planned Parenthood in a pair of abortion-related cases when she was an attorney in private practice. She also spoke against the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.

“This is a critical issue in this race,” Crawford said. “My opponent has said he believes the 1849 law in Wisconsin is valid law and he’s trying to backpedal from that position now.”

Donations from billionaires Musk and Soros at issue

Crawford said that Musk, a close adviser to Trump, “has basically taken over Brad Schimel’s campaign.”

Groups funded by Musk have spent more than $10 million in support of Schimel on television ads and going door to door canvassing for his candidacy. One of those flyers says that Schimel would defend Trump’s agenda as a member of the court.

“This is unprecedented to see this kind of spending on a race,” Crawford said.

She said it was “no coincidence” that Musk started spending on the race days after his electric car company Tesla sued the state over its decision blocking it from opening dealerships in Wisconsin.

Schimel fired back, “If Elon Musk is trying to get some result in that lawsuit, he may be failing because I enforce the law and I respect the laws passed by the Legislature.”

Schimel said he has no control over outside donations, or the messages they spread.

He was asked, in light of the donations from Musk, if he would rule against Trump.

“If President Trump or anyone defies Wisconsin law and I end up with a case in front of me, I’ll hold them accountable as I would anybody in my courtroom,” Schimel said.

Donald Trump Jr. and political activist Charlie Kirk plan to co-host a town hall on Monday in Wisconsin that’s being billed as a get-out-the-vote effort for Schimel.

Crawford has benefited from donations from prominent national Democrats such as Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker who gave the state Democratic Party $1.5 million, which then donated it to Crawford’s campaign.

Schimel called Soros “a dangerous person to have an endorsement from.”

When asked what the difference was between the Musk and Soros donations, Crawford said, “I have never promised anything and that is the difference.”

Union rights

As an attorney, Crawford sued in an attempt to overturn the state’s law that effectively ended collective bargaining for public workers. That law, known as Act 10, was the centerpiece of former Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s tenure and made Wisconsin the center of the national debate over union rights.

A Dane County judge last year ruled that the bulk of the law was unconstitutional, and an appeal of that ruling is expected to come before the state Supreme Court.

Crawford said she “most likely” would recuse herself from a case challenging Act 10 if it were focused on the same provisions in the lawsuit she brought. But she said the current lawsuit is on different parts of the law.

When Schimel was attorney general, he said he would defend Act 10 and opposed having its restrictions also applied to police and firefighter unions, which were exempt from the law.

Schimel did not say in the debate whether he would recuse himself if a challenge to the law came before the court.

Voter ID

A measure on the April 1 ballot would enshrine Wisconsin’s voter ID law in the state constitution.

Schimel said he will vote for the amendment. Crawford, who sued to overturn the voter ID law, declined to say how she would vote on the amendment.

Congressional redistricting

A challenge to the state’s congressional district boundaries is expected to come before the court.

Crawford appeared at a briefing with donors earlier in the campaign that was billed in an email by organizers as a “chance to put two more House seats in play.”

Crawford said in the debate that she didn’t talk about redistricting during the call and the email sent by the organizers was “not an appropriate way to announce a judicial candidate.”

Schimel said it was hard for him to believe Crawford.

“We have to take my opponent’s word for it what happened on that phone call,” he said.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court debate: Abortion, billionaires’ donations take center stage is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin’s version of the Elon Musk-led effort charged with making government run more efficiently struck a more collegial, bipartisan tone in its first meeting Tuesday, taking input from Democrats and hearing testimony from a broad array of government leaders.

Wisconsin is one of several states that have sought to mimic the work of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, run by billionaire Musk at the federal level. Others that have created similar groups include Florida, Oklahoma, Iowa, Missouri, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana and New Hampshire.

The Wisconsin Assembly’s GOAT committee, which stands for Government Operations, Accountability and Transparency, is much more constrained in its mandate and powers than DOGE, which has broad authority given to it by President Donald Trump.

The Wisconsin committee was created by Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, but three of its nine members are Democrats. There is no counterpart in the state Senate, which means any of its recommendations may face difficulty clearing both houses of the Legislature.

And the committee can’t unilaterally fire state workers or slash government spending. Broad actions like that require action by the full Legislature, which is controlled by Republicans, in addition to Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.

Evers has broken records for vetoing Republican-sponsored bills, making it highly unlikely he would go along with anything significant the GOAT committee may recommend.

Still, as a committee of the Legislature, it was able to solicit testimony Tuesday from numerous agency heads in Evers’ administration at its first meeting Tuesday. University of Wisconsin President Jay Rothman and Bob Atwell, the founder of Nicolet National Bank, also testified.

Republican Rep. Amanda Nedweski, chair of the committee, said the goal was to address “strong demand from the public” about what is happening with telework, state office use, whether public workers are being held accountable, what cybersecurity is in place and whether there is a cost savings.

Nedweski even cut off fellow Republican and committee vice chair Rep. Shae Sortwell when he began asking questions of a state education department official about spending related to DEI.

“We’re going to stay on topic today,” Nedweski said.

Sortwell sent numerous requests seeking information to the state’s largest cities and all 72 counties related to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in local governments across the state before the committee met, drawing criticism from Democratic members of the committee. Wisconsin Watch was the first to report on Sortwell’s efforts.

Vos, the Assembly speaker who created the GOAT committee, has said that its goal was to root out waste, fraud and abuse in state government. He attributed Sortwell’s inquiries to information gathering related to that goal.

DOGE claims credit for saving more than $100 billion at the federal level through mass firings, cancellations of contracts and grants, office closures and other cuts that have paralyzed entire agencies. Many of those claimed savings have turned out to be overstated or unproven.

DOGE’s work during the early stages of the Trump administration has drawn nearly two dozen lawsuits. Judges have raised questions in several cases about DOGE’s sweeping cost-cutting efforts, conducted with little public information about its staffing and operations.

Wisconsin’s DOGE-inspired effort gets off to more collegial start is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Four Wisconsin voters whose ballots were not counted in the November presidential election initiated a class-action lawsuit Thursday seeking $175,000 in damages each.

The voters were among 193 in Madison whose ballots were misplaced by the city clerk and not discovered until weeks after the election. Not counting the ballots didn’t affect the result of any races.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission investigated but did not determine whether Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl failed to comply with state law or abused her discretion.

She didn’t notify the elections commission of the problem until December, almost a month and a half after the election and after the results were certified on Nov. 29.

The goal is to reinforce and strengthen the right to vote in Wisconsin, said attorney Jeff Mandell, who is general counsel of Law Forward, which filed claims against the city of Madison and Dane County on Thursday.

“When people’s votes are not counted, when the right to vote is violated, our democracy is diminished,” Mandell said during a news conference announcing the action.

The four affected voters are seeking $175,000 each from the city of Madison and Dane County. That is above the $50,000 maximum that can be sought in class-action lawsuits against municipalities.

The lawsuit will argue that the cap is unconstitutional, the notice of claim said.

The number of affected voters who could join the lawsuit might grow, Mandell said. All of the voters whose ballots were not counted are named in the notice made public Thursday.

Madison takes election integrity seriously, the city’s spokesperson, Dylan Brogan, said in reaction. He noted that the clerk’s office apologized for the error both publicly and to each affected voter.

The clerk’s office has also taken steps to ensure the such a mistake won’t happen again and looked forward to additional guidance from the state elections commission, Brogan said. He declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit.

The state elections commission is scheduled to discuss its investigation into the uncounted ballots on Friday.

According to a summary of its findings, the clerk didn’t explain what exactly happened at the polling places, how the uncounted ballots went unnoticed all day on Election Day or how they were misplaced.

She also hasn’t said whether she spoke to the chief inspectors in the affected wards to find out what happened, making it difficult to develop guidelines to help election clerks throughout the state avoid similar issues, investigators said.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin voters whose ballots were not counted in November election seek damages is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

An audit of the November election won by President Donald Trump in swing-state Wisconsin found that not a single vote was counted incorrectly, altered or missed by tabulating machines.

The audit also found no evidence that any voting machine or software had been hacked or otherwise tampered with. The Wisconsin Elections Commission released the audit’s findings last week and is scheduled to discuss them Friday.

Trump defeated former Vice President Kamala Harris in Wisconsin by just over 29,000 votes.

In 2020, when Trump lost to Joe Biden by just under 21,000 votes, Trump and his supporters alleged there was widespread fraud in Wisconsin. But two partial recounts, a nonpartisan audit, a conservative law firm’s review and multiple state and federal lawsuits did not support the claims.

Trump and his allies have not made similar accusations about wrongdoing in the 2024 election that he won.

Meagan Wolfe, Wisconsin’s top elections official, said in a memo that the audit shows the public how effectively elections are run and also works to “dispel any misinformation or disinformation about the security of electronic voting systems.”

The post-election audit is required under state law and has been done after each general election since 2006. Local elections officials in 336 randomly selected municipalities across the state hand-counted 327,230 ballots as part of the 2024 audit. That is nearly 10% of all Wisconsin ballots cast in the 2024 election and the largest post-election audit ever undertaken in the state.

The only errors found during the audit were made by people, not the vote-counting machines. And only five human errors were detected, resulting in an error rate of just 0.0000009%, according to the report.

“My hope is that this reassures persons on all sides of the political aisle that voting tabulators are doing their jobs accurately,” Ann Jacobs, chair of the elections commission, said in a post last week on the social media platform X. “We all lament when our candidate loses, but in WI, it wasn’t because someone hacked the machines. The other guy just got more votes.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin audit of Trump win finds not a single voting machine error is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin Democratic Gov. Tony Evers on Tuesday decried what he called “irresponsible decisions in Washington” and “needless chaos,” saying his new two-year spending proposal was designed to prepare for drastic cuts from the federal government.

Evers released his budget as he considers seeking a third term in the battleground state that President Donald Trump narrowly won in November.

Evers’ budget is more of a wish list than a roadmap of what will actually become law. Republicans who control the Legislature promised to kill most of his proposals, as they have done on his three previous budgets, before passing it later this year.

“With so much happening in Washington that’s reckless and partisan, in Wisconsin we must continue our work to be reasonable and pragmatic,” Evers told the Legislature and other guests.

He urged lawmakers to leave $500 million available to respond to situations caused by federal decisions.

Here are highlights of Evers’ $119 billion two-year budget, which would increase spending by more than 20%:

Pushing back against Trump on tariffs, higher education

Evers said that Trump’s tariffs — or import taxes — could spark trade wars with Wisconsin’s largest exporters and hurt the state’s $116 billion agriculture industry.

Trump has imposed 10% tariffs on China and threatened, then delayed for 30 days, 25% taxes on goods from Canada and Mexico.

“I’m really concerned President Trump’s 25% tariff tax will not only hurt our farmers, ag industries and our economy but that it will cause prices to go up on everything from gas to groceries,” Evers said.

Evers’ plan calls for creating a new agriculture economist position in state government to help farmers navigate market disruptions caused by tariffs. He’s also calling for increasing funding to help farmers find and increase markets for their products.

Tariffs are just one issue where Evers has fought back against the Trump agenda.

Evers also previously called for a bipartisan solution to immigration, while criticizing Trump’s move to deport people in the country illegally.

And Evers proposed the highest increase in Universities of Wisconsin funding in state history, citing concerns about federal cuts.

“Politicians in Washington don’t know a darn thing about what’s going on at campuses across Wisconsin,” Evers said. “They don’t know how important our UW System has been to our state’s success or how important it is for our future.”

Evers taps into the Republican priority of cutting taxes

Evers has clashed with Republicans over tax cuts in the past, gutting a $3.5 billion tax cut in the last budget, while approving a $2 billion tax cut in 2021. In his new budget, Evers called for cutting a variety of income, sales and property taxes by nearly $2 billion, while increasing the income tax on millionaires by $1.3 billion.

Republicans will almost certainly kill any tax increase. They have said they want to use the state’s entire $4 billion surplus on cutting taxes.

The Evers plan includes eliminating the income tax on tips and doing away with the sales tax on over-the-counter medications. He also proposed reducing income taxes for the middle class and creating a new incentive for local governments not to increase property taxes.

Republican Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu discounted Evers’ tax cuts as “gimmicky,” called the budget “irresponsible” and said the GOP will deliver an alternative broad tax cut proposal soon.

Fighting water pollution caused by ‘forever chemicals’

Evers and Republicans have long been at odds over how to battle PFAS pollution, even as numerous Wisconsin communities struggle with contamination from the so-called forever chemicals and are forced to drink only bottled water.

Evers is calling for spending $145 million to fight the pollution through additional testing to find the pollution and researching ways to combat it.

PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are man-made chemicals that don’t easily break down in nature. The chemicals have been linked to health problems including low birth weight, cancer and liver disease and have been shown to make vaccines less effective.

Republicans unlikely to go along with Democratic plan

Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said most of Evers’ plan was “dead on arrival” and said the GOP would start from scratch. Republicans have repeatedly rejected his calls to expand Medicaid and legalize recreational marijuana. They are also unlikely to increase funding for K-12 schools and the Universities of Wisconsin budget as much as Evers wants.

Evers also proposed making Wisconsin the first state in the country to audit insurance companies over denying health care claims.

However, Republicans did not summarily reject another major Evers proposal to close the 127-year-old prison in Green Bay as part of a massive overhaul of the state’s correctional system.

Associated Press writer Todd Richmond contributed to this report.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers calls for tax cuts, pushback on Trump’s tariffs is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin’s Democratic-backed incumbent state schools leader will face a Republican-supported challenger after both advanced in Tuesday’s three-person primary.

The winner in the April 1 general election will guide education policy in the battleground state during President Donald Trump’s second term.

Jill Underly, currently serving her first term as state superintendent, and Brittany Kinser, an advocate of the state’s private school voucher program and public charter schools, both advanced in Tuesday’s primary. Jeff Wright, a rural school superintendent, was eliminated.

Underly was first elected to head the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in 2021 with the support of Democrats and teachers unions. She has tried to position herself as the champion for public schools.

She said her win shows that voters “love their public schools.”

“They are also committed to making sure their public schools stay viable and every kid has these opportunities to be successful,” Underly said.

She was endorsed by the Wisconsin Democratic Party, which also has given her campaign $106,000 this month, and a host of Democratic officeholders.

But the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the statewide teachers union, did not endorse a candidate in the primary. The political action committee for the union had recommended Wright be endorsed.

Wright, a two-time Democratic candidate for state Assembly, tried to cut into Underly’s base of support. He won the endorsements of the Association of Wisconsin School Administrators and the Middleton-Cross Plains teachers union.

Kinser, an education consultant, invited Wright’s backers who were unhappy with Underly’s leadership to back her.

“I’m welcoming Jeff and his supporters to come and join our campaign so we can restore high standards for all children in Wisconsin,” Kinser said.

Wright is going to “take some time to think” before he endorses anyone, his spokesperson Tyler Smith said.

Kinser is backed by Republicans, including the state party, which has given her campaign $200,000 so far.

Underly accused Kinser of being “focused on expanding vouchers, and these policies put our public schools in a dangerous race to the bottom.”

Kinser countered that her campaign is focused on bolstering achievement for all students, no matter what type of school they attend.

Wisconsin is the only state where voters elect the top education official but there is no state board of education. That gives the person who runs the Department of Public Instruction broad authority to oversee education policy, which includes dispersing money to schools and managing teacher licensing.

Whoever wins will have to manage Wisconsin’s relationship with the Trump administration as it seeks to eliminate the federal Department of Education, which supports roughly 14% of public school budgets nationwide with an annual budget of $79 billion.

CLARIFICATION: The Associated Press updated this story to make clear that Kinser is an advocate for the state’s private school voucher program and public charter schools.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Incumbent Wisconsin school leader Jill Underly, GOP-backed challenger Brittany Kinser advance in primary is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a Republican Party official lacked the standing to bring a lawsuit challenging the use of a mobile voting van in 2022.

The lawsuit sought to ban the use of mobile voting vans in any future election in the presidential battleground state. The court did not address the legality of mobile voting sites in its ruling, meaning mobile voting vans could be used in future elections.

A single van has been used only once — in Racine in a primary election in 2022. It allowed voters to cast absentee ballots in the two weeks leading up to the election. Racine, the Democratic National Committee and others argue that nothing in state law prohibits the use of voting vans. City officials said that in light of the state Supreme Court ruling, they plan to use the van again during the state’s elections in April, calling it an important tool for ensuring all voters can cast their ballots.

The court did not rule on the merits of the case. Instead, it ruled 4-3 to dismiss the case, with four liberal justices in the majority and three conservative justices dissenting.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Racine County voter who brought the lawsuit, the county’s Republican Party chairman, Ken Brown, was not “aggrieved” under state law and therefore was not permitted to sue.

Brown filed a complaint the day after the August 2022 primary with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, arguing that the van violated state law. He argued that it was only sent to Democratic-leaning areas in the city in an illegal move to bolster turnout.

Racine city Clerk Tara McMenamin disputed those accusations, saying it shows a misunderstanding of the city’s voting wards, which traditionally skew Democratic.

The elections commission dismissed the complaint four days before the 2022 election, saying there was no probable cause shown to believe the law had been broken. Brown sued.

Justice Rebecca Bradley, who wrote the dissent in Tuesday’s ruling, said the ruling means that the elections commission’s decision will be left unreviewed by courts “and the People are left, once again, without a decision on fundamental issues of election law enacted to protect their sacred right to vote.”

Bradley said the ruling will make it more difficult for any voter who believes election law has been violated to bring lawsuits.

“The majority, once again, refashions the law to its own liking as it shuts the doors of the courthouse to voters,” Bradley wrote.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative law firm, represented Brown. The firm’s deputy counsel, Lucas Vebber, said in a statement that the ruling prevents Wisconsin residents from holding government officials accountable.

Wisconsin’s Democratic attorney general, Josh Kaul, praised the ruling, saying the decision means that “in-person absentee voting will remain widely available and won’t be unnecessarily restricted.”

Republicans in this case argued that it violates state law to operate mobile voting sites, that their repeated use would increase the chances of voter fraud, and that the one in Racine was used to bolster Democratic turnout.

Wisconsin law prohibits locating any early voting site in a place that gives an advantage to any political party. There are other limitations on early voting sites, including a requirement that they be “as near as practicable” to the clerk’s office.

For the 2022 election, McMenamin, the Racine clerk, and the city had a goal of making voting as accessible to as many voters as possible.

Racine purchased its van with grant money from the Center for Tech and Civic Life, a nonprofit funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. Republicans have been critical of the grants, calling the money “Zuckerbucks” that they say was used to tilt turnout in Democratic areas.

Wisconsin voters last year approved a Republican-backed constitutional amendment banning the use of private money to help run elections.

The van was used only to facilitate early in-person voting during the two weeks prior to that 2022 election, McMenamin said. It traveled for two weeks across the city, allowing voters to cast in-person absentee ballots in 21 locations.

A Racine County Circuit Court judge sided with Republicans, ruling that state election laws do not allow for the use of mobile voting sites.

The elections commission argued on appeal that Brown did not have standing to seek an appeal in court of the commission’s decision. The law allows for anyone who is “aggrieved” by a commission order to seek judicial review, but the state Supreme Court said Brown failed to show how he suffered because of the commission’s decision.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court rules Republican had no right to bring lawsuit challenging mobile voting is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Milwaukee public school district struggles with a “culture resistant to change” that has undermined its ability to function properly, disproportionately harming its most vulnerable students, an audit ordered by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and released on Thursday found.

Evers, who served as Wisconsin’s superintendent of schools before becoming governor, ordered the independent audit last year after it became known the district failed to submit financial reports to the state leading to the resignation of the district’s superintendent and the withholding of funding by state officials.

The audit found that the Milwaukee Public Schools district, which is the state’s largest, with more than 66,000 students, must make sweeping, high-level changes to be more transparent with parents and taxpayers.

“MPS must make systemic changes to ensure that students — particularly the most vulnerable — are at the center of every decision,” the audit by MGT of America Consulting said. “Ultimately, this work is in service of students, whose future success hinges on a district capable of delivering equitable, high-quality education.”

Auditors identified “critical issues stemming from leadership and staff turnover, fragmented planning, outdated systems, and unproductive reporting protocols, which have led to siloed operations and inefficient practices.”

Evers, in a statement, urged the district to quickly accept the audit’s 29 recommendations.

“This audit is a critical next step for getting MPS back on track and, ultimately, improving outcomes for our kids,” Evers said.

The school district said in a statement that the audit will serve as a guide for improvement.

“While acknowledging the need for focused support, the report makes clear that we have an opportunity to build on this momentum, strengthening our schools and communities while creating a more unified path forward,” the district said.

The audit was released two days after Milwaukee Public Schools announced it was hiring former Boston Public Schools Superintendent Brenda Cassellius as its new superintendent. The audit also comes amid a race for the state superintendent of schools, in which school and student performance is a top issue.

Evers made $5.5 million in public funds available for a pair of audits. The first one cost $2.5 million, and Evers said the remaining $3 million will be used to help the district implement the audit’s recommendations. He is proposing that an additional $5 million be spent to address future audit results, including one pending related to instruction.

The money would only be awarded if the state is satisfied that the district is making progress, Evers said.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Milwaukee school audit finds widespread problems hurting Wisconsin’s largest district is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court justice on Wednesday rejected a Republican request that she not hear a pending case that seeks to restore collective bargaining rights that tens of thousands of teachers, nurses and other state workers lost in 2011.

Her decision came at the same time the court, without comment, declined to hear the case as unions requested before it first goes through a lower appeals court.

Justice Janet Protasiewicz decided against recusing herself after Republican legislative leaders filed a motion saying she should not hear the case because she voiced opinions about the law during her 2023 campaign.

Her decision is a win for liberals who have fought for more than a decade to overturn the law known as Act 10, which effectively ended collective bargaining for most public unions.

Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn withdrew from the case on Jan. 30. Hagedorn helped write the law when he was serving as then-Gov. Scott Walker’s chief legal counsel.

The court’s decision not to immediately hear the case means it is almost certain not to consider it until after the April 1 election. That election will determine whether liberals maintain their majority on the court. Even if the conservative wins, due to Hagedorn’s recusal, the court would be split 3-3 between liberal and conservative justices when considering the case.

Christina Brey, a spokesperson for the unions that brought the lawsuit, said they were disappointed in the delay but they remained confident.

Wisconsin’s anti-union law has been challenged for years

Seven unions representing teachers and other public workers in Wisconsin filed the lawsuit seeking to overturn the anti-union 2011 law, known as Act 10. The law had withstood numerous legal challenges before a Dane County circuit court judge in December found the bulk of it to be unconstitutional, setting up the appeal to the state Supreme Court.

The Act 10 law effectively ended collective bargaining for most public unions by allowing them to bargain solely over base wage increases no greater than inflation. It also disallowed the automatic withdrawal of union dues, required annual recertification votes for unions and forced public workers to pay more for health insurance and retirement benefits.

Dane County Circuit Judge Jacob Frost in December ruled that the law violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into “general” and “public safety” employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011.

The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal.

The union law divided Wisconsin and the country

The law’s introduction in 2011 spurred massive protests that stretched on for weeks. It made Wisconsin the center of a national fight over union rights, catapulted Walker onto the national stage, sparked an unsuccessful recall campaign and laid the groundwork for Walker’s failed 2016 presidential bid.

The law’s adoption led to a dramatic decrease in union membership across the state. The nonpartisan Wisconsin Policy Forum said in a 2022 analysis that since 2000, Wisconsin had the largest decline in the proportion of its workforce that is unionized.

In 2015, the GOP-controlled Wisconsin Legislature approved a right-to-work law that limited the power of private-sector unions.

If the lawsuit is successful, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power will have it restored. They would be treated the same as the police, firefighter and other public safety unions that remain exempt.

Divisions remain over the effectiveness of the law

Supporters of the law have said it gave local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued.

Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions.

Republicans wanted Protasiewicz not to hear the case

Protasiewicz is the court’s newest member and ran in 2023 as an opponent of the union law. Her victory gave liberals the majority on the court for the first time in 15 years. That majority is on the line again in the April 1 Supreme Court election to fill the seat of a retiring liberal justice.

Protasiewicz said during her campaign that she believes Act 10 is unconstitutional. She also told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she would consider recusing herself from any case challenging the law. Protasiewicz participated in protests against it and signed the petition to recall Walker.

In her response to the Legislature’s request that she not hear the case, Protasiewicz said she could hear the case fairly.

“I am confident that I can, in fact and appearance, act in an impartial manner in this case,” she said.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court justice rejects Republican call to step down in key union case is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A new television attack ad in Wisconsin’s hotly contested Supreme Court race features a doctored image of the liberal candidate, a move that her campaign claims could be a violation of a recently enacted state law.

The image in question is of Susan Crawford, a Dane County circuit court judge. It appeared in a new TV ad paid for by the campaign of her opponent Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County circuit court judge.

The winner of the high-stakes race on April 1 will determine whether the Wisconsin Supreme Court remains under a liberal majority or flips to conservative control.

The Schimel campaign ad begins and ends with a black-and-white image of Crawford with her lips closed together. A nearly identical color image from her 2018 run for Dane County Circuit Court shows Crawford with a wide smile on her face.

Crawford’s campaign accused Schimel of manipulating the image, potentially in violation of a state law enacted last year. The law, passed with bipartisan support in the Legislature and signed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, requires disclosure if political ads use audio or video content created by generative artificial intelligence. Failure to disclose the use of AI as required can result in a $1,000 fine.

“Schimel will try to manipulate images and the facts because he’s desperate to hide his own record of failure,” Crawford spokesperson Derrick Honeyman said in a statement.

Schimel’s campaign spokesperson Jacob Fischer said the image was “edited” but not created by AI.

Peter Loge, the director of the Project on Ethics in Political Communication at George Washington University, said images should never be changed to give a false impression.

“That said, as these things go, it’s not that egregious,” Loge said of the Schimel ad.

He pointed to numerous other examples of images being doctored for use in political ads, including one in 2015 by a political action committee supporting Wisconsin Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson. The image showed then-President Barack Obama smiling and shaking hands with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. In 2020, U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar, a Republican from Arizona, posted the fake image again on social media.

Obama and Rouhani never met. The image was fake.

A doctored image was also used last year in a television ad in the Indiana governor’s race.

“A good rule of thumb is to take everything with a grain of salt,” Loge said. “Just because you see it on television or on the internet doesn’t mean it’s true.”

The Schimel ad attacks Crawford over the release of a convicted rapist in 2001 because the state’s office of criminal appeals missed the deadline to appeal to the state Supreme Court. Crawford headed the division at the time, but the error miscalculating the appeal deadline was made by another attorney in the office and by two secretaries, according to a report by the attorney general.

“Crawford didn’t bother filing the appeal in time, letting the rapist walk free,” the Schimel ad claims.

After that error was discovered, Crawford ordered a review of every pending appeal’s deadline and personally calculated the deadline for petitions for review to the state Supreme Court. Republican officeholders at the time who investigated what happened, including then-state Rep. Scott Walker, said the error was an isolated incident.

Schimel served one term as attorney general between 2015 and 2019 when Walker was governor. Walker appointed Schimel as a judge the day after Schimel lost reelection in 2018.

Altered image of Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Susan Crawford in ad raises ethics concerns is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice said Thursday he will not participate in a pending case that will determine whether tens of thousands of public sector workers regain collective bargaining rights that were taken away by a 2011 law.

Justice Brian Hagedorn drafted the law, known as Act 10, when he was chief legal counsel for then-Gov. Scott Walker. His decision to recuse himself from the case leaves the court with four liberal justices and two conservatives.

The Republican-controlled Legislature earlier this week asked that liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz not hear the case because before she joined the court she called the law unconstitutional, signed a petition to recall Walker during the fight over the law and marched on the Capitol in protest in 2011.

Hagedorn, in a brief two-page order, said the law commands that he not hear the case. Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday had called on him to step aside.

“The issues raised involve matters for which I provided legal counsel in both the initial crafting and later defense of Act 10, including in a case raising nearly identical claims under the federal constitution,” Hagedorn wrote.

Protasiewicz has not responded to the call that she step aside. Even if she did, the court would still have a 3-2 liberal majority.

She did not participate Thursday in an incremental ruling related to the case.

A Dane County circuit judge last month overturned the bulk of the law, saying it violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into “general” and “public safety” employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011.

The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal. School worker unions that brought the lawsuit have asked the Supreme Court to take it directly, skipping the appeals court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take the case.

Now, Hagedorn will not participate in that decision or any others related to the lawsuit.

Supporters of the law have said it provided local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued.

Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Brian Hagedorn steps aside in pivotal union rights case is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The liberal candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court participated in a briefing with Democratic donors billed as a “chance to put two more House seats in play,” a move that Republicans say shows that she is committed to redrawing congressional districts to benefit Democrats.

The event is just one of many partisan gatherings the candidates in the nonpartisan-in-name-only race have attended. Both candidates are also accepting large donations from partisans, including the Democratic and Republican parties, as both sides fight for control of the court in the battleground state.

Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, faces liberal Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford in the April 1 election. The race will determine whether liberals maintain their 4-3 majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court or it flips to conservative control.

The 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court race, which was also for ideological control of the court, was the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. This year’s race is shaping up to be even more expensive and has already garnered national attention from multibillionaire Elon Musk, a Donald Trump loyalist.

The possibility of redrawing Wisconsin’s congressional district boundaries is just one of several major issues the court could tackle, in addition to abortion rights, election laws and union rights. The liberal-controlled court in December 2023 ordered new legislative maps, which Democrats credited with them gaining seats in November.

Now Democrats are hoping the court will redraw congressional lines. The state Supreme Court in March declined to take up a congressional redistricting case brought by Democrats.

The Wisconsin Republican Party on Wednesday accused Crawford of “selling two of Wisconsin’s seats” in Congress because of her participation in an event with Democratic donors organized by the liberal group Focus for Democracy. The email invitation to the Jan. 13 event billed it as a “chance to put two more House seats in play for 2026.”

The New York Times first reported on the event, saying it was organized by California billionaire and Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman. Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Ben Wikler, who is running for the Democratic National Committee chair, appeared at the event with Crawford.

“In an appeal to entice out-of-state billionaires, Susan Crawford said the quiet part out loud: she is begging to be bought and paid for,” Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Brian Schimming said in a statement Wednesday.

Schimel’s campaign said Crawford sees the Supreme Court seat “as a political weapon used to undermine the Wisconsin people and deliver favors to out-of-state, liberal elites.”

“Susan Crawford has proven she will do anything in her pursuit of power, even offer congressional seats for support of her campaign,” the Schimel statement said.

Crawford’s campaign spokesperson Derrick Honeyman said in a statement that Crawford is running to be a “fair, impartial, and common sense justice.”

“She has not publicly or privately commented on congressional redistricting at any time and was on this call briefly to share her background and why she’s running,” Honeyman said.

Honeyman pointed to partisan events that Schimel has attended, including an inaugural gala for Trump in Washington, D.C. Schimel also traveled the state talking with county Republican parties and other conservative groups. Schimel has said he expects conservative outside groups to spend between $10 million and $15 million on the race.

The Wisconsin Democratic Party has given $1 million to Crawford’s campaign. Democrats also spent millions last year trying to flip two of the state’s congressional districts but were unsuccessful.

Democrats have long targeted the 1st Congressional District in southeast Wisconsin held by Republican Rep. Bryan Steil and western Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District held by Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate criticized for attending briefing with Democratic donors is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature on Tuesday asked that a liberal state Supreme Court justice step aside in a pending case that seeks to overturn a 2011 law that effectively ended collective bargaining for most state workers.

If Justice Janet Protasiewicz agrees not to hear the case, the court would be deadlocked 3-3 between liberals and conservatives. The lawsuit has massive implications for union rights in the battleground state.

A Dane County Circuit Court judge last month overturned the bulk of the law, saying it violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into “general” and “public safety” employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011.

The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal. School workers unions that brought the lawsuit have asked the Supreme Court to take it directly, skipping the appeals court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, controlled 4-3 by liberals, has not yet decided whether to take the case.

Republicans enacted the law in the face of massive protests 14 years ago that made Wisconsin the center of the national fight over union rights. The debate also catapulted then-Gov. Scott Walker onto the national stage, sparked an unsuccessful recall campaign and laid the groundwork for his failed 2016 presidential bid. The law’s adoption led to a dramatic decrease in union membership across the state.

Protasiewicz is the court’s newest member and ran in 2023 as an opponent of the union law, known as Act 10. Her victory gave liberals the majority on the court for the first time in 15 years. That majority is on the line again in the April 1 Supreme Court election to fill the seat of a retiring liberal justice.

Protasiewicz said during the campaign that she believes Act 10 is unconstitutional. She also told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she would consider recusing herself from any case challenging the law. Protasiewicz participated in protests against it and signed the petition to recall Walker.

The Legislature’s top Republicans, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, said Tuesday that it would be “right and ethical” for her to step aside. The motion seeking her recusal references comments she made during the campaign about coming from a union background, her belief that the law was unconstitutional and her opposition to Walker.

“Recusal is warranted because of the appearance that she has prejudged the merits of this case,” Republicans argued in the motion.

Protasiewicz declined to comment when asked via email if she would recuse herself. The decision on whether to do so is entirely hers.

Jacob Karabell, attorney for the unions seeking to overturn the law, called the recusal request “meritless” and an attempt to delay a final ruling.

Protasiewicz is not the only justice on the court with a potential conflict.

Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn was Walker’s chief legal counsel and had a role in drafting Act 10. During his successful run for the court in 2019, Hagedorn would not promise to recuse himself if a case challenging Act 10 came before the court.

No motion has been filed with the court asking Hagedorn to step aside, but Democratic legislative leaders on Tuesday said he should. Hagedorn did not respond to an email seeking comment.

If both Protasiewicz and Hagedorn recused themselves, liberals would have a 3-2 advantage.

Supporters of the law have said it provided local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued.

Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Republicans ask Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz to step aside in union case is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin Democratic Gov. Tony Evers used his seventh State of the State speech Wednesday to urge the GOP-controlled Legislature to enact a wide range of proposals Republicans have rejected in the past, including numerous gun control measures just a month after there was a school shooting not far from the state Capitol.

Republicans were quick to dismiss his proposals, much as they have the past six years.

Here’s what to know about the speech from Evers, a Democrat who may run for a third term next year in the battleground state:

Bipartisan approach to immigration and health care

Evers, without mentioning President Donald Trump by name, said “there is a lot of angst about what may happen in the days, months and years ahead.”

“I have always been willing to work with anyone who is willing to do the right thing for the people of Wisconsin,” Evers said. “And that has not changed. But I will not compromise on our Wisconsin values of treating people with kindness, dignity, empathy, and respect.”

Evers called for bipartisan efforts to address immigration.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said Republicans would next week introduce a bill that requires cooperation with federal law enforcement officials who are working to deport people who have committed a crime and are in the country illegally.

“He didn’t pay attention to what happened in this state in the election in November,” Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August said of Evers. “President Trump won Wisconsin, and one of the cornerstones of his campaign was about illegal immigration. … He’s clearly pushing back against the president.”

Wisconsin is one of 22 states suing the federal government over Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship.

Wisconsin is one of the “blue wall” states that Trump won in 2016 but lost in 2020. Trump carried Wisconsin in 2024 on his way back to the White House.

Gun control is renewed priority despite Republican opposition

Evers called for a series of gun control measures five weeks after a school shooting just 6 miles from the Capitol left a teacher and a 14-year-old student dead. The 15-year-old shooter shot and killed herself.

Evers called for universal background checks for gun purchases and restoring a 48-hour waiting period for gun purchases, a law that Republicans repealed in 2015.

He also called for banning the purchase of “ghost guns” and closing a loophole that allows for domestic abusers to own firearms.

Evers also called for incentives and new requirements to safely secure firearms and a “red flag” law that would allow judges to take guns away from people determined to be a risk to themselves or others.

Republican legislative leaders said that all of the gun control measures would be rejected.

The governor last week created a state office for violence prevention, which Republicans vowed not to fund after federal funding runs out in two years.

Evers, a former teacher and state superintendent of schools, also called for spending $300 million to provide comprehensive mental health services in schools statewide. That would be 10 times the amount the Legislature approved for school mental health services in the last budget.

Republicans vow to reject proposals, push for cutting taxes instead

Republican leaders immediately rejected the bulk of what Evers called for, saying they instead would be pushing for a tax cut of nearly $1,000 for every taxpayer in the state.

Evers’ speech “was chock full of liberal wishes, empty promises and a whole lot of things that are not going to happen in Wisconsin,” Vos said.

Declaring 2025 as “The Year of the Kid,” Evers called on Republicans to approve $500 million to lower the cost of child care. The bulk of that would go toward funding the Child Care Counts program for the next two years. Without more funding, the program — which was created during the COVID-19 pandemic — is slated to end in June.

Republicans said they would not support that additional funding.

Evers also called for creating new programs designed to set price ceilings for prescription drugs and improve oversight of drug companies, removing the state sales tax on over-the-counter medications and capping the copay on insulin at $35.

In an emotional moment, Evers welcomed the widow and parents of former state Rep. Jonathan Brostoff, who died by suicide in November. Evers, his voice cracking with emotion, talked about Brostoff’s death when introducing a new program that would allow people to temporarily and voluntarily register to prevent themselves from purchasing a firearm.

Vos said that invoking Brostoff was a “cheap political stunt” and “kind of sad.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

State of the State: Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers urges gun control measures, bipartisan approach to immigration is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday rejected an attempt by a conservative activist to obtain guardianship records in an effort to find ineligible voters, but the case could return.

The court did not rule on the merits of the case, instead saying in its 5-2 decision that a lower appeals court did not follow proper procedure when it issued a ruling saying the records should be released.

Here’s what to know:

Conservative activist brought the case

The case tested the line between protecting personal privacy rights and ensuring that ineligible people can’t vote.

Former travel agent Ron Heuer and a group he leads, the Wisconsin Voter Alliance, allege that the number of ineligible voters doesn’t match the count on Wisconsin’s voter registration list. Heuer asked the state Supreme Court to rule that counties must release records filed when a judge determines that someone isn’t competent to vote so that those names can be compared to the voter registration list.

Justices lean on technicality to reject the case

The justices said the District II appeals court, based in Waukesha, was wrong to overturn a Walworth County Circuit Court ruling denying access to the records. In a nearly identical lawsuit, the District IV appeals court, based in Madison, had denied access to the records saying they were not subject to disclosure under the state public records law.

Justice Janet Protasiewicz, writing for the majority, said that the District II appeals court could have sent the case to the Supreme Court, explaining why the other appeals court ruling was incorrect.

If it follows the proper procedure for doing that, the case could end up right back before the Supreme Court again. In the meantime, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the appeals court for further action.

All four liberal justices were joined by conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn in the majority. He said the different branches of the appeals court must be unified in their actions.

Chief Justice Annette Ziegler and Justice Rebecca Bradley, both conservatives, dissented, saying the court “leaves unresolved issues of great importance to voters, election officials, and people from whom courts have removed the right to vote due to incompetency.”

Sam Hall, the attorney for Walworth County, praised the ruling.

“We all agree that election integrity is fundamental and our citizens must have confidence in our elective process, while also respecting the dignity of those individuals subject to guardianship orders,” he said.

A court has the power to remove the right to vote from a person under a guardianship order if the person is determined to be unable to understand “the objective of the election process.”

The attorney for Heuer did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

Case was one of several targeting 2020 election

The case was an attempt by those who questioned the outcome of the 2020 presidential race to cast doubt on the integrity of elections in the presidential swing state. Heuer and the WVA filed lawsuits in 13 Wisconsin counties in 2022 seeking guardianship records.

The District II appeals court in 2023 overturned a circuit court ruling dismissing the case and found that the records are public. It ordered Walworth County to release them with birthdates and case numbers redacted.

Heuer and the WVA have pushed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election in a failed attempt to overturn President Joe Biden’s win in Wisconsin. Heuer was hired as an investigator in the discredited 2020 election probe led by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman that found no evidence of fraud or abuse that would have changed the election results.

The WVA also filed two unsuccessful lawsuits that sought to overturn Biden’s win in Wisconsin.

Trump won Wisconsin in 2024 after losing in 2020

Biden defeated Donald Trump by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin in 2020, a result that has withstood independent and partisan audits and reviews, as well as lawsuits and the recounts Trump requested. Trump won Wisconsin in 2024 by about 29,000 votes.

There are no pending lawsuits challenging the results of the 2024 election or calls to investigate the outcome.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court refuses to release voter records sought by conservative activist is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday over whether a Republican-controlled legislative committee’s rejection of a state agency rule that would ban the practice of “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ people was unconstitutional.

The challenge comes amid the national battle over LGBTQ+ rights. It is also part of a broader effort by the Democratic governor, who has vetoed Republican bills targeting transgender high school athletes, to rein in the power of the GOP-controlled Legislature.

Here are things to know about the case:

What is ‘conversion therapy’?

So-called “conversion therapy” is the scientifically discredited practice of using therapy to “convert” LGBTQ+ people to heterosexuality or traditional gender expectations.

The practice has been banned in 20 states and in more than a dozen communities across Wisconsin. Since April 2024, the Wisconsin professional licensing board for therapists, counselors and social workers has labeled “conversion therapy” as unprofessional conduct.

Advocates seeking to ban the practice want to forbid mental health professionals in the state from counseling clients with the goal of changing their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Fair Wisconsin, the only statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights and political advocacy organization, has heard about “conversion therapy” happening across the state, said the group’s executive director, Abigail Swetz.

However, accurate data about how often it is happening is hard to come by, she said. There would be some data if the ban is enacted and the state is able to take action against licensed practitioners, but that wouldn’t include attempts at “conversion therapy” made by religious institutions, Swetz said.

What is happening in Wisconsin?

The provision barring “conversion therapy” in Wisconsin has been blocked twice by the Legislature’s powerful Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules — a Republican-controlled panel in charge of approving state agency regulations.

The case before the liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court will determine whether the ban survives. The court will also determine if that legislative committee has been overreaching its authority in blocking a variety of other state regulations during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ administration.

The lawsuit brought by Evers targets two votes by the joint committee. One deals with the Department of Safety and Professional Services’ “conversion therapy” ban. The other vote blocked an update to the state’s commercial building standards.

Republicans who supported suspending the “conversion therapy” ban have insisted the issue isn’t the policy itself, but whether the licensing board had the authority to take the action it did.

Evers has been trying since 2020 to get the ban enacted, but the Legislature has stopped it from going into effect.

Justices question how far legislative power goes

Liberal Justice Jill Karofsky focused on the “conversion therapy” rule, calling the practice “beyond horrific.”

“There are real lives that are at risk here,” she said. “This is hurting people.”

Other justices focused on whether the Legislature or the governor has the power to issue administrative rules.

The Legislature’s attorney Misha Tseytlin said decades of precedent are on his side, including a 1992 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling upholding the Legislature’s right to suspend state agency rules. Overturning that ruling would be deeply disruptive, he argued.

Evers, in arguing that the ruling should be overturned, said in court filings that by blocking the rule, the legislative committee is taking over powers that the state constitution assigns to the governor. The 1992 ruling conflicts with the constitution and has “proved unworkable,” Evers said.

Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley said the state constitution clearly gives the power to the Legislature.

“Nowhere do I see that the people ever consented to be governed by an administrative state instead of their representatives in the Legislature,” she said.

The issue goes beyond ‘conversion therapy’

The “conversion therapy” ban is one of several rules that have been blocked by the legislative committee. Others pertain to environmental regulations, vaccine requirements and public health protections.

Evers argues in the lawsuit that the panel has effectively been exercising an unconstitutional “legislative veto.”

The court sided with Evers in one issue brought in the lawsuit, ruling 6-1 in July that another legislative committee was illegally preventing the state Department of Natural Resources from spending money on a land stewardship program.

The issue related to state regulations was broken out and heard Thursday.

The court, controlled 4-3 by liberal justices, will issue a written ruling in the coming months.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Supreme Court scrutinizes ‘conversion therapy’ ban, separation of powers is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.