Money talks, but apparently not enough for Wisconsinites to elect a state supreme court justice.
Elon Musk has become one of the largest names in American politics, spurring controversy for his unelected position within the Trump Administration’s Department of Government Efficiency.
Musk recently founded the American Political Action Committee, a PAC fund that supported President Donald Trump’s campaign during the 2024 United States election. According to Forbes, Musk’s net worth is currently $380.9 billion. He certainly has money to expend should he wish to support candidates during an election.
Since Trump has gained the White House, local elections have become key indicators for how the country is reacting to his policies and his allies. On April 1, Wisconsinites voted for a new Wisconsin Supreme Court justice following Justice Ann Walsh Bradley’s retirement, among other measures. Susan Crawford ran against Brad Schimel, a man who was backed by Trump and financially supported by Musk.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, Musk’s America PAC spent around $15 million to elect Schimel. Overall, Schimel received around $54 million for his campaign, while Crawford received around $46 million.
Those campaign contributions show a concerning pattern of extraordinary investment in elections. The Wisconsin Supreme Court election became highly partisan, with both candidates making promises to constituents as if they were being elected to Congress. A campaign advertisement for Crawford accused Schimel of being “too extreme” for the Supreme Court while alleging he let sexual assaulters “walk free” while “victims waited for justice.”
The use of invective language in political campaigns is not a new concept. However, a Supreme Court Justice is a different type of elected office compared to a congressional member. One thing must be clear: A state supreme court examines and interprets the law, but any campaign promises about protecting people may not be entirely followed because the courts are not made up of legislators.
It is a reminder that the court system, especially in contentious, politically-divided states benefits from a more liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court majority to protect key freedoms supported by the Democratic Party; however, not all promises made to constituents can be kept because some cases may not appear before the Supreme Court as frequently as others.
This election also shows that, despite Wisconsin’s role in electing Trump as president, money cannot elicit precise outcomes, and the power of a collective people cannot be underestimated. Wisconsin’s citizens voted in overwhelmingly large numbers. Decision Desk HQ reported that 2,364,372 people voted in this election. As a comparison, Ballotpedia reports that a total of 813,200 voted in 2015 to elect Bradley.
Nearly three times the number of residents came to the polls, which is a stunning show of civic engagement in an “off year” when there was not a general election for president.
April’s election results are significant because they show that politics, to some extent, cannot be bought by billionaires; they are won when people show up at the polls. When the final ballots are counted, the largest influence at play is always how many people voted for who, not how much was spent. Especially in a contest to elect an individual to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, justice is not an item to be bought, it is won at the hands of the people.
Aiden is a freshman studying journalism. Please note that the views expressed in this column do not reflect those of The Post. Want to talk to Aiden? Reach him on Instagram at @aiden_with_an_i_ or email him at ar260223@ohio.edu.
