On April 7, 2026, the state of Wisconsin held its 18th Supreme Court election of the 21st century. After conservative incumbent Rebecca Bradley decided not to run for reelection due to the 4–3 liberal majority solidified by Susan Crawford in last year’s election, the floor was open to new candidates, and liberal Chris Taylor was briefly running unopposed (WPR). However, Appeals Court Judge Maria Lazar of Waukesha stepped in to oppose Judge Taylor on October 1, 2025. Both judges aimed to reduce politicization of the court, but otherwise have starkly different sensibilities. Lazar was endorsed by several republicans who opposed Donald Trump’s loss in 2020, and received further support from the organization Pro Life Wisconsin. Taylor, on the other hand, formerly worked for Planned Parenthood and received support from the Democratic Party, making reproductive rights a key point of contention between the two candidates.
In Shorewood, Judge Taylor received 5,141 votes and Lazar received 535 out of 5,678 votes. This was a significantly lower voter turnout than last year’s 7,586 votes. In the state as a whole, Taylor received 60.1% of the vote, or 905,155 votes. Lazar ended up with 39.8%, or 600,044 out of 1,506,442 total votes. This shifted the court majority to 5-2 in favor of the liberals, which gives them the ideological advantage until at least 2030 (PBS Wisconsin). This will shift the tide on some important issues like gerrymandering and labor unions.
“In the Supreme Court, there’s a lot of big things that they’re going to be deciding within the next two years, including some…new political maps, which can have a big impact,” said Nicole Magin, social studies teacher with a background in political science and legal studies. “There’s also a lot of issues that could be coming down, such as with Act 10, which had a lot of influence in the 2010s on getting rid of labor unions for teachers and other public workers. Potentially, these things being overturned will have a really big influence on the state of Wisconsin and how we go moving forward.”
The perceived political alignment of these judicial candidates was also a contentious topic during the election. Both judges were clearly favored by different parties, calling their non-partisan alignment into question. There was some concern when Taylor was found to be listed as a Democrat on some political ad paperwork, however her team stated that this was a simple mistake (Cap Times). The candidates were both listed as Independent once the issue was resolved. Both judges were vocal about prioritizing fairness over any partisan concerns; each also pointed out partisan alignment as a potential flaw in their opponent (WPR).
Compared to previous Supreme Court races, this year’s election was relatively subtle, indicated by the lower voter turnout. One reason that arose to explain this was that conservatives put less effort into campaigning following consecutive Supreme Court election losses. Another factor at play was that control of the court was not at stake; a liberal victory would only result in a stronger liberal majority while a conservative victory would maintain the liberal control (NYT).
The low-profile nature of this election was somewhat unforeseen. Even with the notable withdrawal of the incumbent, a relatively uncommon scenario that has the potential to alter the court’s ideological composition by opening a seat, the election attracted much less attention than last year’s. The 2025 race between Crawford and Brad Schimel became the most expensive judicial election of all time with $100 million in spending. This election, on the other hand, only cost $9 million (The Badger Herald).
Although Taylor’s landslide victory was somewhat unexpected, exceeding expectations based on pre-election polls, it may have been aided by some significant endorsements the candidate received, including that of former president Barack Obama, former attorney general Eric Holder, and Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin senator. Taylor was also endorsed by a myriad of labor unions, organizations, and several judicial officials, including Crawford and former chief justice Ann Walsh Bradley. She was also endorsed by the Democratic Party, as well as the Working Families Party.
Lazar received fewer endorsements, with only one endorsement from a fellow judicial official, former Chief Justice Annette Ziegler. She did, however, receive the endorsement of former governor Scott Walker and of several U.S. representatives, all republicans. She was also endorsed by only one labor union, the Wisconsin Fraternal Order of Police.
While perhaps the most impactful for Wisconsin residents, the race for State Supreme Court judge was not alone on the ballot for this spring election. For the first time in over 20 years, Waukesha held an open mayoral race, meaning incumbent mayor Shawn Reilly chose to not run for re-election. The two running were Common Council President Alicia Halvensleben, liberal leaning, and Republican state Rep. Scott Allen (PBS). Waukesha is known to be traditionally Republican, yet Halvensleben won the election by a margin of less than 500 votes. This matches the results of the State Supreme Court election, as the state of Wisconsin continues to see more victories for the Democratic Party (Fox 6).
Also on the ballot in this election were Wisconsin Court of Appeals judges, for districts 1, 2, and 4. Incumbent Judge Joe Donald, Anthony Francis LoCoco, and incumbent Judge Rachel A. Graham all ran unopposed for their respective districts (NYT).
Several Shorewood students voted in this election, and for most this was their first experience voting in a civic election. However, for many, this experience can serve as a landmark moment, initiating the journey of adulthood.
“My parents and my grandparents are very involved in voting and making sure people do, so I was excited to vote for the first time,” said Annika Brown, senior.
For some, being civically active can be a daunting task. Volunteers are a key part of the voting process, for both veteran and new voters.
“I went to the city hall and people were very helpful there and helped me understand the process,” Brown said.
Magin emphasised the value of student engagement in government, explaining how crucial it is to build civic engagement as a young person.
“I would definitely encourage all of our students to vote, having youth representation within our government is so important,” Magin said. “Getting in the habit [of voting] early when you’re in high school, especially in these smaller spring elections, is really important for all of our students. It gives them a chance to understand how the process works.”
Student voters shared this perspective, and cited global impact as a main motivating factor for going out to the polls.
“I was excited to be able to vote, I feel like it’s a pretty big deal,” Brown said. “I think it’s important because you can share your own opinion and have an influence on what’s going on in the world.”
Magin specifically acknowledged how key the state supreme court election is for students, as it has an acute effect on Wisconsin residents.
“These are like really the elections that in a big way, if students are staying in Wisconsin, will affect them the most out of anything else,” Magin said. “Presidential and congressional elections are obviously really important, but the things that we don’t really think about as often are the local elections. Those really have a lot more of an impact on each of our students and everybody in the state.”
Like Magin, fellow social studies teacher Jesse Perez emphasized the importance of students getting involved in voting. Perez specializes in Civics class, which includes several mock elections. To him, local elections like this one are an opportunity for students to start enacting what they learn in Civics.
“Any time I get to see students participating in the democratic process, I am so happy,” Perez said. “I feel like young people truly feel voiceless so often…My hope is that by having [them] participate in the democratic process for our class, and see their impact on how the class unfolds throughout the semester, they might be more incentivised to participate in real life elections with the hopes that their visions for the future are realized.”
For Perez, the success of said democratic process depends on the belief, support, and understanding of the people.
“People [turn to] more extreme methods when they feel as though the process of voting and elections, and other democratic systems don’t work,” Perez said. “When people understand how our government works, where it falls short, and feel as though they have a place amongst it, they can actually have hope that the future might be shaped by their views…with their direct intervention, our country can be pulled in a better direction.”