Have Conservatives Given Up Contesting Wisconsin High Court Races?

Wisconsin conservatives have a question to answer before the holidays: Who is going to run for the Supreme Court?

Two liberals have been campaigning since April for a seat held by a conservative. Nomination papers can begin circulating Dec. 1. The regular filing deadline is Jan. 5.

There is still time to enter. There is less time to build a campaign.

Two liberals, one open seat, zero conservatives

Clark County Circuit Judge Lyndsey Brunette and state Appeals Judge Pedro Colón announced their campaigns in April. They are seeking the seat of Justice Annette Ziegler, who announced March 9 that she would finish her term but not seek reelection in 2027.

No conservative candidate has begun to organize a campaign, much less register with the state.

That does not establish that nobody is preparing to run. Campaign registration is not ballot qualification, and a public directory cannot tell us whether private recruiting is underway. But nothing has reached the public arena.

The clock is ticking.

These are legally nonpartisan elections. Wisconsin’s seven justices serve staggered 10-year terms. Liberal and conservative describe their ideological alignments, not official Democratic and Republican seats. Nor do those labels tell us how a justice will vote in every case.

The deadline is not April

The Wisconsin Elections Commission’s calendar sets Dec. 1 as the first day to circulate nomination papers. The regular filing deadline is 5 p.m. Central on Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2027. But it’s not as simple as signing up to run. Ballot access isn’t difficult to achieve, but it takes some effort.

Supreme Court candidates need at least 2,000 valid signatures from Wisconsin electors. State law specifies a range of 2,000 to 4,000 signatures. Nomination papers and a declaration of candidacy go to the Elections Commission. Campaign registration is also required, with state candidates registering through the Ethics Commission.

Judicial candidates must file statements of economic interests with the Ethics Commission by the regular deadline of 4:30 p.m. Central on Jan. 8. Nomination papers can be challenged. Submitting paperwork does not guarantee a place on the ballot.

The signature window includes Christmas and New Year’s. A candidate starting late would need volunteers, signatures, money and a way to introduce himself or herself while voters are busy with the holidays.

Dec. 1 is not a legal deadline to announce a campaign. Candidates can announce and organize earlier. Campaign finance registration obligations can arise when someone receives contributions or spends money to support a candidacy, but there is no indication that a conservative candidate has been laying in the weeds, strategically waiting to announce.

If more than two candidates qualify, a Feb. 16 primary will narrow the field to two. There is no reserved place for a conservative finalist. If only Brunette and Colón qualify, they would proceed to the April 6 election without a Supreme Court primary.

Waiting until January to think seriously about April would leave little room for error.

it also dramatically cuts down on time to raise money. Including any potential independent expenditures and third party efforts, it’s not unrealistic to expect a winning statewide effort to need in excess of $10 million dollars

Four straight losses

Conservatives did not lose their court majority all at once.

Michael Gableman’s defeat of liberal Justice Louis Butler in 2008 began a 15-year conservative majority. By 2016, that majority stood at 5-2, and Rebecca Grassl Bradley’s victory over JoAnne Kloppenburg preserved it.

Rebecca Dallet defeated Michael Screnock for Gableman’s open seat in 2018, narrowing the conservative advantage to 4-3. Brian Hagedorn’s narrow victory over Lisa Neubauer for retiring liberal Justice Shirley Abrahamson’s seat in 2019 restored it to 5-2.

Then came four consecutive liberal victories.

Jill Karofsky defeated Justice Daniel Kelly in 2020, reducing the conservative majority to 4-3. Despite his lack of public appeal and electoral prowess, Kelly again was the conservative nominee in 2023. Janet Protasiewicz defeated him for the seat of retiring conservative Justice Pat Roggensack, giving liberals a 4-3 majority.

Susan Crawford defeated Brad Schimel in 2025 to succeed liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, preserving that balance. This April, Chris Taylor defeated Maria Lazar for the seat Rebecca Grassl Bradley was leaving. Taylor took office Aug. 1, expanding the liberal majority to 5-2.

That record has clearly made recruiting a conservative candidate harder. However, it does not make the next election irrelevant.

A loss would push a majority further away

A conservative victory in April would not flip the court. It would keep the liberal majority at 5-2. A liberal victory would expand it to 6-1.

Under the regular election schedule, losing in 2027 would leave conservatives unable to regain a majority before 2033. They would have to win the seats next up in 2028 and 2030, retain Hagedorn’s seat in 2029, and win Protasiewicz’s seat in 2033 to reach four.

That calculation assumes no intervening vacancies, appointments or changes in ideological alignment. It is a count of seats and terms, not a prediction about how the justices will rule.

In 2017, Ziegler ran unopposed because liberals failed to field a challenger. A decade later, conservatives face the possibility of leaving the election for her seat to two liberals.

I would not claim to know why a prospective candidate has stayed out, but the ugly and expensive nature of the recent contests are good bets. Nevertheless conservative leaders and Republican Party officials can be asked what they are doing to recruit a candidate.

Voters who want a different judicial philosophy deserve a candidate willing to explain it and defend it.

If conservatives intend to compete, they need to show voters who will carry that argument before the nomination papers come due.

Time is running out.