Now that Dane County Judge Susan Crawford has been elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, cementing its liberal majority until at least 2028, attention turns to which high-profile cases she could play a role in deciding.
Crawford doesn’t take office until Aug. 1, so she won’t be involved in cases until then. She replaces outgoing liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, who didn’t run for re-election.
The legal status of abortion, the future of collective bargaining for public workers and the state’s congressional maps are among the issues that dominated debate during the race, and the high court could have the final word on them.
There’s another topic that’s likely to keep coming up after Crawford joins the bench: Recusal.
On the campaign trail, Crawford was frequently asked whether she’d step away from cases that address laws she challenged, including voter ID and Act 10, as a private attorney representing liberal groups.
Crawford said she’d look at the specifics of each case, including the parties bringing the lawsuit and the arguments they’re making. Legal experts say recusal isn’t necessary for a case broadly related to a justice’s previous work — that would lead to a slippery slope.
Here’s the status of major political issues in Wisconsin and whether the state Supreme Court is currently considering them:
More: Here’s what Susan Crawford’s Wisconsin Supreme Court win means for who controls the court
When will the Wisconsin Supreme Court rule on Act 10?
In December, Dane County Judge Jacob Frost overturned Act 10, the 13-year-old law that banned most collective bargaining among public employees, sparked massive protests at the state Capitol and turned then-Republican Gov. Scott Walker into a nationally known political figure.
The judge placed his ruling on hold, meaning the law is still in effect.
In February, the Supreme Court denied a petition to bypass the court of appeals and take up the case directly. So, the case now sits in appeals court and is in progress — the parties that appealed have an April 4 deadline to file briefs.
If the three-judge appeals panel’s ruling is appealed again, it would go to the state Supreme Court, which is highly likely. Depending on the timing, Crawford could be part of the final ruling.
More: Now that Act 10 has been overturned, what’s next for Wisconsin teachers, professors and others?
Is there a case challenging Wisconsin’s abortion laws?
Actually, there are two. The court heard oral arguments for one case in November. That case is about whether the state’s 1849 law specifically bans abortions or whether more recent laws or court rulings override it.
The court hasn’t decided that case, and conservative candidate Brad Schimel accused the current justices of delaying a decision on a politically important issue, but the timeline isn’t really out of the ordinary yet.
Crawford won’t be part of the decision in that case. But it’s possible she could be involved in a second case led by Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, asking the court to recognize a “constitutional right to bodily autonomy,” including abortion.
The court hasn’t scheduled oral arguments in that case, and it’s been nearly a year since the court ordered parties to file responses. That was a signal it could consider Planned Parenthood’s decision.
Wisconsin bans abortions after 20 weeks. Providers like Planned Parenthood resumed abortions in Wisconsin in fall 2023 after a judge on a lower court signaled she didn’t believe the 1849 law applied to consensual procedures like abortions.
More: Would Susan Crawford have to recuse from any abortion case? Why experts say she wouldn’t.
Are Wisconsin’s congressional maps being challenged?
In December 2023, the state Supreme Court declared Wisconsin’s legislative maps unconstitutional. Newly drawn boundaries reduced Republicans’ advantage, and Democrats picked up 14 seats in 2024 while falling short of a majority.
Shortly after that decision about maps for the state Assembly and Senate, the court rejected a request to reconsider the state’s congressional boundaries.
Crawford received heavy criticism from conservatives after participating in a virtual “donor briefing advisory” billed as a “chance to put two more House seats in play for 2026.”
That apparently refers to Wisconsin’s competitive western and southeastern U.S. House districts, represented by Republican Reps. Derrick Van Orden and Bryan Steil.
More: Supreme Court race puts spotlight on congressional maps as GOP files complaint against Crawford
Crawford has said she simply introduced herself and explained to the Democratic donors why she was running. Her campaign said she has never commented on congressional redistricting, publicly or privately.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries advocated for electing Crawford, saying he thought she could participate in redrawing congressional districts more favorably for Democrats, adding to Republicans’ criticism.
Again, there’s no current lawsuit before the Supreme Court challenging the district lines for Wisconsin’s eight U.S. House members. But it’s possible one could be filed.
More: Hakeem Jeffries says a Crawford victory could lead to congressional maps better for Democrats
What other issues will go before the state Supreme Court?
It’s hard to predict what other issues could arise in state government or politics that would spur a future Supreme Court case.
For example, one of Gov. Tony Evers’ vetoes in the 2023 state budget led to a lawsuit that the court is currently considering.
But we can look at the court’s list of pending cases for an idea of the types of issues they weigh in on.
Those include a case asking whether the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association is a “state actor” and a lawsuit about PFAS that could impact whether the state can pursue charges against a manufacturer of the “forever chemicals.”
More: When is the next Wisconsin Supreme Court election?
