MADISON, Wis. — During the race for a position on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, Brad Schimel, a judge from Waukesha County, criticized the court’s liberal majority, all female justices, for being swayed by emotions during the oral arguments concerning an abortion rights case. His comments drew swift condemnation from his opponent’s campaign, labeling them as “disgusting.”
Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, is competing against Susan Crawford, a judge from Dane County endorsed by Democrats, in the crucial April 1 election. The debate on abortion rights has been a central issue, with Schimel opposing and Crawford supporting them. Despite their individual views, both candidates have pledged to maintain impartiality if the matter arises before the court.
The outcome of this election will be pivotal as it will decide whether the liberal justices maintain control over the state’s highest court. Expected rulings on abortion, union rights, congressional redistricting, and election laws are at stake in the battleground state. This election is also seen as an early referendum for political parties following President Donald Trump’s swing state victories, including Wisconsin.
Criticism from Schimel arose in a Nov. 12 radio interview, a day after a case challenging the state’s 1849 abortion ban was heard. Crawford, formerly an attorney with a liberal firm endorsed by Planned Parenthood, had previously initiated a different case advocating for abortion rights.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported Schimel’s comments, where he described the liberal justices as nearly overwhelmed with emotion. Schimel stated on WSAU-AM, “A Supreme Court justice had better be able to set their personal opinions and their emotions aside and rule on the law objectively.” He argued that the current liberal majority lacks this objectivity.
Responding to Schimel’s remarks, the four liberal justices issued a statement condemning his views as outdated and misrepresentative of women, accusing him of undermining decades of progress. “These petty and personal attacks have no place in our campaigns and courtrooms,” they declared while expressing their endorsement for Crawford.
The justices involved in the statement, Jill Karofsky, Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet, and Janet Protasiewicz, are seeking to fill the vacancy created by Bradley’s retirement. The winner of this election will secure a 10-year term on the bench.
In defense of Schimel, his campaign presented comments from two women on the conservative side of the court. They claimed Schimel’s comments were not sexist but rather a critique of political biases they perceived within the liberal majority. Justice Rebecca Bradley stated, “Judge Schimel’s legitimate criticisms have nothing to do with gender,” emphasizing that his focus was on alleged political activism among their liberal peers.
Chief Justice Annette Ziegler defended Schimel against accusations of sexism, asserting they were “baseless.” Jacob Fischer, Schimel’s campaign spokesperson, dismissed the criticisms as an attempt to mislead the electorate, stating, “There is no mention of gender in Judge Schimel’s criticism of the current majority.”
When asked further about his stance, Schimel reiterated his belief that one female justice was unable to maintain objectivity, emphasizing that he has seen men lose control similarly. He specifically pointed to Justice Karofsky, who he claimed “was literally yelling at an attorney” during the session. She did not comment on the matter when approached via email.
Derrick Honeyman, representing Crawford’s campaign, blasted Schimel’s statements as “disgusting insults” and indicative of “extremism that has no place in our state,” reinforcing their firm opposition to his candidacy for the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
