Wisconsin’s under-the-radar, ongoing Supreme Court contest has national consequences for judicial power, women’s rights and the next presidential fight.
As attention builds toward the 2026 election cycle, the first major political test is already underway. Early in-person voting has begun for Wisconsin’s April 7 state Supreme Court election–a high-stakes contest that, despite its “nonpartisan” label, reflects the same ideological battles reshaping courts across the country.
The race, recently spotlighted by the nonpartisan voter guide platform guides.vote, pits two sitting Wisconsin Court of Appeals judges—Chris Taylor and Maria Lazar—against each other to fill an open seat left by conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley, who announced last August she would not seek reelection. Both candidates are women, so the April 7 result will not change one defining feature of the court: its overwhelming female majority. Women hold six of the seven seats, more than any other state supreme court in the nation (though all are white, in a state where more than one in five residents identifies as a person of color.)
Though candidates do not run with party labels, Taylor is widely seen as the liberal-backed candidate, while Lazar, a member of the Federalist Society, aligns with conservative legal networks that have spent decades building influence in both federal and state courts.
In recent years, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has become a central battleground in the fight over abortion rights, voting access and redistricting. Liberal candidates have won the last three contests, securing a narrow 4–3 majority, most recently cemented by Susan Crawford’s record-breaking 2025 victory—a race that drew more than 2 million voters and over $100 million in spending.
This year’s contest looks much different: As of this week, spending has totaled just over $638,000, a steep drop from the $25 million poured into Crawford’s race at this point in the cycle last year. The quieter tone may suggest a less contentious election—but the stakes remain anything but low.
While this race won’t immediately flip control of the court, its outcome could shape the trajectory of Wisconsin’s judiciary for years to come, potentially determining whether liberals solidify their majority through the end of the decade, and for the next presidential election, or leave the door open for a conservative comeback in the next election cycle.
How This Election Will Shape Wisconsin’s Laws on Abortion, Elections and Voting
Through decisions like Dobbs v. Jackson and Moore v. Harper, the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority has shifted significant power to state courts, transforming state supreme courts into central battlegrounds for major civil rights battles.
In Wisconsin, that shift is already playing out. While this election won’t immediately change the court’s ideological balance, it will help determine how the court approaches a slate of high-stakes cases in the years ahead. Among these cases are:
- Two lawsuits seeking to redraw Wisconsin’s congressional maps, which currently favor Republicans, set for jury trial in early 2027. The maps were drawn in 2010 and approved by a conservative-controlled court, and the cases could reach the Supreme Court ahead of the next redistricting cycle.
- A lawsuit targeting Act 10, the 2011 state law that limited public-sector collective bargaining, is expected to reach the state Supreme Court. In 2024, a Dane County circuit court judge ruled the law unconstitutional. The legislation has been linked to a sharp decline in union participation across Wisconsin.
- A lawsuit against Madison election officials alleges that misplaced ballots in the 2024 presidential election disenfranchised voters. The case centers on whether officials can be held liable for failing to count votes, a question with major implications for voting rights enforcement leading into the 2026 midterms.
Recent rulings offer a preview of how a liberal majority has approached these issues.
- Following Crawford’s election, the court determined that Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion law is not applicable, preserving abortion access in the state.
- It unanimously rejected an effort by Republican lawmakers to remove the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s nonpartisan administrator, a case closely tied to concerns about election integrity and the peaceful transfer of power.
- The court has also upheld the state’s authority to regulate PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” signaling a willingness to engage in environmental regulation.
Looking ahead, one of the most pressing issues on the horizon comes with the 2028 presidential election. In 2020, the Wisconsin Supreme Court narrowly blocked an effort to overturn the state’s results. As future election disputes loom, the court could once again play a crucial role in shaping not only Wisconsin’s electoral outcomes, but democratic stability across the country.
A Closer Look at the Candidates
Both candidates have emphasized their commitment to judicial impartiality, pledging to uphold the Constitution and set aside personal political views on the bench. But in a race shaped by broader ideological stakes, their professional records—and the positions they’ve taken throughout their careers—offer a clearer window into how they may approach key legal issues.
Chris Taylor
After working in private practice, Taylor served as policy and political director at Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin before being elected to the state legislature in 2011, where she was an outspoken supporter of abortion rights, gun control and labor protections. She returned to the bench in 2020, first as a Dane County Circuit Court judge and now on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.
Taylor has earned endorsements from multiple liberal state Supreme Court justices, Sen. Tammy Baldwin, more than 150 Wisconsin judges, and several major labor unions. Her campaign has focused on protecting voting rights, reproductive healthcare and strengthening consumer protections.
According to guides.vote:
- On abortion, Taylor writes that she values “women … having the right to make those personal, private health care decisions.” In the Wisconsin Assembly, she introduced a bill specifying “that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to obtain a safe and legal abortion,” except “after viability unless her life or health is endangered.”
- On criminal justice, she introduced a bill specifying that in law enforcement, “deadly force is to be used only as the last resort.” She introduced a bill that would require police officers to have at least eight hours of training in de-escalation techniques and use of force options.
- On the environment, in the Wisconsin Assembly, Taylor introduced a bill that would require the DNR to establish and enforce regulatory standards for PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals.” She introduced a bill that would allow cities and towns to regulate pesticides.
- On gun laws, she introduced a bill to prohibit anyone found guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence from possessing a firearm (expanding from the current felony-level prohibition). In a 2018 interview, she supported background checks and a red flag law. (No recent statements found.)
- On labor, Taylor said, “I’m honored to have the support of the Wisconsin AFL-CIO in this race. Every working family deserves to have their rights and freedoms protected.”
- On redistricting, she sponsored a bill in 2017 that would have created new procedures for preparing redistricting plans. It would establish a Redistricting Advisory Commission and prohibit “redistricting plans from abridging the right to vote on account of race or color or because a person is a member of a language minority group.”
- On voting rules, as an appellate judge, Taylor ruled that missing information in a witness’s address does not invalidate an absentee ballot, so long as the included information is sufficient for a witness to still be contacted by a municipal clerk. In the Assembly, she introduced a bill to allow 17-year-olds to vote in a primary election if they turn 18 by the date of the following general election.
- On her priorities, Taylor says she would make sure that people’s “Constitutional rights are protected.” It is important “for our courts to be places where people feel heard, respected, and treated equally under the law.
Maria Lazar
Maria Lazar began her public service career as a Wisconsin assistant attorney general in 2010 before serving as a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge. She joined the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in 2022. Lazar is a member of the Federalist Society and has not listed any formal endorsements. Her campaign has emphasized a record of being tough on crime and supportive of Second Amendment rights.
According to guides.vote:
- On abortion, Lazar calls the U.S. Supreme Court decision throwing out Roe v. Wade “very wise,” and a “good move forward,” because the 1973 Roe ruling “didn’t work.” She said that Wisconsinites might back a state law banning abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which is about six weeks from conception.
- On citizenship, she responded to President Trump’s Executive Order, which holds that any children born to mothers who are in the United States illegally are not citizens. The Order says that the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to those children. Lazar said that birthright citizenship is not necessarily absolute, and that Congress and the President can interpret the scope of citizenship rights.
- On the environment, as an appellate judge, Lazar ruled that PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals,” can’t be regulated under Wisconsin’s decades-old spills law, that Wisconsin DNR’s regulation of PFAS amounted to “unlawfully adopted rules.”
- On gun laws, as a circuit court judge, she ruled that the Wisconsin city of Delafield could not deny an operating permit for a gun range.
- On labor, as Assistant Attorney General, Lazar defended the manner of enactment of Act 10, which effectively ended collective bargaining for most Wisconsin public employees. “I am proud of how hard everyone at DOJ worked on that case and of the ultimate result,” she said in 2015.
- On redistricting, she says that judges who redraw legislative maps are not following the law. “That’s not what judges are meant to do.”
- On voting rules, as an appellate judge, Lazar ruled that disabled people are not allowed to receive absentee ballots by email, only overseas and military voters. She ruled that the confidential records of people placed under guardianship for incompetency should be made public, in order to see if ineligible voters have voted in Wisconsin elections.
- On her priorities, Lazar says it is time to “draw a line in the sand and stop the destruction of our courts, especially our state Supreme Court.” She says, “I want to bring back dignity, respect, integrity, impartiality, and independence to the court,” suggesting that the public may feel “that the state Supreme Court is bought and paid for.”
How to Vote
You can find your election day polling place here. The Fair Elections Center provides a detailed Wisconsin state voting guide, and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin provides easy-access voter information and resources. An individual is eligible to vote if they are a U.S. citizen, over the age of 18 and have resided in the state for at least 28 days prior to the election. The state provides a guide on acceptable proof of residence and valid photo IDs.
College students may be eligible to vote with their student ID. Common Cause Wisconsin provides information on which campus IDs meet the state’s voter ID requirements and how to obtain the proper identification from your school.
Wisconsin is one of 23 states (and Washington D.C.) that have same-day registration, allowing you to register at the polls on April 7 when you go to cast your ballot. You can also register in advance of Election Day. The deadline for early in-person registration at your local clerk’s office is April 3 at 5 p.m. Early in person voting began on March 24 and runs through April 5.
To vote absentee, you can request a ballot at myvote.wi.gov, where you’ll need a digital copy of your photo ID. The final deadline for most people to request an absentee ballot is April 2nd at 5:00 pm, though the state recommends mailing ballots at least a week in advance (by March 31). The deadline to return your absentee ballot is 8 p.m. on April 7, before polls close
A State Supreme Court Election With National Implications
The significance of this race extends far beyond Wisconsin. This year, 32 states will hold elections for their supreme courts. As state supreme courts take on an increasingly central role in deciding issues like abortion rights, voting access and election law, these once low-profile contests are becoming some of the most consequential elections in American politics. With unprecedented spending, growing national attention, and the potential to shape the legal landscape ahead of the 2028 presidential election, the stakes are only rising.
For voters, that means these elections are no longer optional or obscure. They are pivotal. The future of key rights and democratic processes may hinge not just on who wins national office, but on who sits on state benches. In this moment, showing up to vote is not just civic participation, but a direct investment in the courts that will define the boundaries of American democracy for years to come.
