Liberal Susan Crawford beats Musk-backed candidate in most expensive judicial race in U.S. history
April 1 (UPI) -- Democrat-endorsed Susan Crawford was elected Tuesday to Wisconsin's Supreme Court, besting Republican Brad Schimel who was backed by the world's richest man, Elon Musk.
In her victory speech Tuesday night, Crawford said she received a call from Schimel, conceding the race.
With 71% of votes in, Crawford was poised late Tuesday to win, securing 55.5% of the vote to Schimel's 44.5%, according to unofficial results reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
The win secures her a 10-year seat on the state's highest court, while maintaining its liberal 4-3 majority.
"I am here tonight because I've spent my life fighting to do what's right, that's why I got into this race -- to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all Wisconsinites," Crawford told a crowd of her supporters Tuesday night.
The Wisconsin court race, in addition to two House races in Florida, were seen as an early litmus test of the Trump administration. Money poured into the contest, with the Brennan Center for Justice calling it the most expensive judicial election in U.S. history.
Nearly $100 million was spent on the race, according to the Brennan Center, which said Shimel had received $53. 3 million in support compared to Crawford's $45.1 million.
Musk -- a top adviser to President Donald Trump -- described the race as the "destiny of humanity" at stake, as he handed two voters Friday night each a $1 million check.
"As a little girl growing up in Chippewa Falls, I never could have imagined I'd be taking on the richest man in the world for justice in Wisconsin -- and we won," she said to a cheering crowd.
Musk, who is working with the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency, saw the race as one that could decide the future of legislative districts in Wisconsin. Musk also voiced concern that if the liberal-majority Supreme Court remained they could theoretically permit maps that would affect Republican seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
"The result of that could be the House switches to a Democratic House and then they will try to stop all the government reforms that we're doing and getting done for you, the American people," he said Friday night, referring to various ongoing litigation against the actions of DOGE and the Trump administration.
"What's happening on Tuesday is a vote for which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives -- that is why it is so significant," Musk continued. "And whichever party controls the House, to a significant degree, controls the country, which then steers the course of Western civilization."
The election fills the seat left vacant by the outgoing liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. Such races do not generally gain much attention, but due to the money and the amount of weight put on it by Musk and other conservatives, all eyes were on Wisconsin on Tuesday night.
"Congratulations to Judge Susan Crawford on her victory," former President Barack Obama said on X following the Wisconsinite's victory, "and to the people of Wisconsin for electing a judge who believes in the rule of law and protecting our freedoms."
"Congratulations Wisconsin on electing Susan Crawford," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said on X. "As a result of your strong grassroots organizing, you have defeated the wealthiest person on earth. You have set an example for the rest of the country."
"We can do it."
Crawford is a Dane County Circuit Court judge who had received the endorsement of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. Schimel, a former Republican attorney general for the state, is a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
42 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Senate Republicans are in a sprint on Trump's big bill after a weekend of setbacks
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The hours ahead will be pivotal for the Republicans, who have control of the Congress and are racing against Trump's Fourth of July deadline to wrap up work. The 940-page 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' as it is now formally titled, has consumed the Congress as its shared priority with the president, with no room politically to fail, even as not all Republicans are on board. Advertisement A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. It also said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade. Advertisement House Speaker Mike Johnson's leadership team has recalled lawmakers back to Washington for voting in the House as soon as Wednesday, if the legislation can first clear the Senate. But the outcome remains uncertain, especially after a weekend of work in the Senate that brought less visible progress on securing enough Republican support, over Democratic opposition, for passage. Senators to watch Few Republicans appear fully satisfied as the final package emerges. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who announced Sunday he would not seek reelection after Trump badgered him over his opposition to the package, said he has the same goals as Trump, cutting taxes and spending. But Tillis said this package is a betrayal of the president's promises not to kick people off health care, especially if rural hospitals close. 'We could take the time to get this right,' he thundered. At the same time, some loosely aligned conservative Senate Republicans — Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming — have pushed for steeper cuts, particularly to health care, drawing their own warning from Trump. 'Don't go too crazy!' the president posted on social media. 'REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected.' GOP leaders barely secured enough support to muscle the legislation past a procedural Saturday night hurdle in a tense scene. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep it on track. As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.' Advertisement Several provisions in the package including a higher tax deduction for native whalers and potential waivers from food stamps or Medicaid changes are being called the 'Polar Payoff' designed for her state. But some were found to be out of compliance with the rules by the Senate parliamentarian. What's in the big bill All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips. The Senate package would roll back billions of dollars in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements, making sign-up eligibility more stringent and changing federal reimbursements to states. Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants. Democrats ready to fight Unable to stop the march toward passage, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress are using the tools at their disposal to delay and drag out the process. Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took 16 hours. Then Democratic senators took over Sunday's debate, filling the chamber with speeches, while Republicans largely stood aside. 'Reckless and irresponsible,' said Sen. Gary Peters, a Democrat from Michigan. 'A gift to the billionaire class,' said Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats. 'Follow what the Bible teaches us: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,' said Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., as Sunday's debate pushed past midnight. Advertisement Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits. 'In my 33 years here in the United States Senate, things have never — never — worked this way,' said Murray, the longest-serving Democrat on the Budget Committee. She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books. 'Go back home,' she said, 'and try that game with your constituents.' ___ Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Fatima Hussein and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
EPA employees put names to 'declaration of dissent' over agency moves under Trump
A group of Environmental Protection Agency employees on Monday published a declaration of dissent from the agency's policies under the Trump administration, saying they 'undermine the EPA mission of protecting human health and the environment.' More than 170 EPA employees put their names to the document, with about 100 more signing anonymously out of fear of retaliation, according to Jeremy Berg, a former editor-in-chief of Science magazine who is not an EPA employee but was among non-EPA scientists or academics to also sign. The latter figure includes over 70 Nobel laureates. The letter represents rare public criticism from agency employees who could face blowback for speaking out against a weakening of funding and federal support for climate, environmental and health science. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health made a similar move earlier in June. "Since the Agency's founding in 1970, EPA has accomplished (its) mission by leveraging science, funding, and expert staff in service to the American people. Today, we stand together in dissent against the current administration's focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise," the letter read. Agency spokespeople did not immediately respond Monday to messages seeking comment. Employees want the EPA get back to its mission 'I'm really sad. This agency, that was a superhero for me in my youth, we're not living up to our ideals under this administration. And I really want us to,' said Amelia Hertzberg, an environmental protection specialist at the EPA who has been on administrative leave since February from the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights, while the administration works to close down her department. Hertzberg's work focused on the most vulnerable groups impacted by pollution: pregnant and nursing people, young children and babies, the elderly, people with preexisting and chronic health conditions and people living in communities exposed to higher levels of pollution. That wasn't supposed to be controversial, but it's become so in this political climate, she said. 'Americans should be able to drink their water and breathe their air without being poisoned. And if they aren't, then our government is failing,' she said. Berg, who also directed the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at NIH from 2003-2011, said the dissent isn't motivated by partisan criticism. He said the employees hope it will help the EPA get back to the mission for which it was established — which 'only matters if you breathe air and drink water." The letter outlines what the EPA employees see as five main concerns: undermining public trust; ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters; reversing EPA's progress in America's most vulnerable communities; dismantling the Office of Research and Development; and promoting a culture of fear, forcing staff to choose between their livelihood and well-being. EPA has cut funding and rolled back federal regulations Under Administrator Lee Zeldin, EPA has cut funding for environmental improvements in minority communities, vowed to roll back federal regulations that lower air pollution in national parks and tribal reservations, wants to undo a ban on a type of asbestos and proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas. Zeldin began reorganizing the EPA's research and development office as part of his push to slash their budget and gut their study of climate change and environmental justice. And he's seeking to roll back pollution rules that an Associated Press examination found were estimated to save 30,000 lives and $275 billion every year. 'People are going to die,' said Carol Greider, a Nobel laureate and professor of molecular and cellular biology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who also signed the letter. She described last week's East Coast heat wave as evidence of the ways people are feeling the effects of climate change. 'And if we don't have scientists at the EPA to understand how what we do that goes into the air affects our health, more people are going to die,' she added. Berg said the declarations of dissent from both the NIH and EPA employees are noteworthy because they represent scientists speaking out as their careers are on the line. Even non-agency employees have to consider whether the government will withdraw research funding. Greider, asked about fears of repercussions or retaliation, said she's 'living the repercussions of everything.' She regularly meets with graduate students who are worried about pursuing scientific careers as labs lose funding. It's a long-term problem if we aren't supporting the next generation of scientists, she said: "That's decades worth of loss.' ___ ___
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
Big Beautiful Bill update: Timeline, summary, and latest polling as Senate vote-o-rama starts today
Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill are working to pass President Trump's controversial One Big Beautiful Bill Act. A marathon session of voting in the U.S. Senate, known in Washington as a 'vote-o-rama,' is expected to begin on Monday, according to CNN. But just what is in the bill, when will it become law, and how do Americans feel about it? Here's what you need to know. What's in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act? This isn't an easy one to answer simply because the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is so large. In its current form, it spans around 940 pages and is packed with everything from tax breaks for the rich to changes to Medicare to defense spending. Few people have actually read the entire One Big Beautiful Bill Act—including many of the Senators who are expected to vote on it this week. And that's a bad thing, because when new laws are this sprawling and the changes so sweeping, they often result in unforeseen negative impacts. There are at least hundreds of changes to U.S. law in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but some of the most dramatic changes revolve around tax cuts for the rich, largely paid for by cuts to Medicaid, the health insurance program designed to provide healthcare to America's most poor and needy. Citing estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), PBS has a good rundown of some of the major elements of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Some of those elements are: $3.8 trillion in tax cuts, with the wealthy and corporations benefiting the most. $350 billion for border and national security spending. Medicaid and other government healthcare and social services cuts would result in 10.9 million Americans losing their health insurance coverage, and 3 million Americans losing their access to food stamps. The elimination of a $200 tax on gun silencers. A provision that would deter individual U.S. states from regulating artificial intelligence. $40 million in funding to establish a 'National Garden of American Heroes.' When will the One Big Beautiful Bill Act become law? There are several remaining steps that the bill needs to go through to become law. Earlier this month, the House passed its version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. However, Senate Republicans disagreed with many elements of the House version of the bill and have been making revisions to it in their chamber. Those revisions are ongoing. Meanwhile, President Trump has also set an arbitrary timeline for when he desired the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to be passed. The deadline Trump stated is Friday, July 4. Yet it is precisely this artificial deadline that has many worrying that lawmakers will not take the time they need to fully examine the bill's elements and consider the long-term consequences it may have on Americans. Republicans, of course, may still not agree on a new version of the bill, which could mean that Trump's July 4 deadline could come and go. For now, here's what you may be able to expect as far as a timeline this week, per CNN: Republicans need to get their party holdouts to support the One Big Beautiful Bill Act as it currently stands, or make changes to it that will satisfy the holdouts. This process may be completed on Monday, or it could stretch for several days. Meanwhile, Democrats, who all universally oppose the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, will have their clerks read out the bill in Congress; this is estimated to take 10 to 15 hours due to the length of the bill and is being used as a stalling tactic. If any Republican Senators stick around for the bill's reading, it may be the first time some of them have actually heard what is in the entire 940-page bill. A debate on the bill will follow the Democrats' reading of the bill. A 'vote-a-rama' will then take place on the bill. This is where Senators vote on amendments to it. A lot of this 'vote-a-rama' will involve political theater, and as CNN notes, Democrats will likely use Republican Senators' votes during this process in campaign attack ads during the midterm elections next year. Finally, there will be a vote on passing the final One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law. No Democrats are expected to support the bill, and there may even be a few Republican holdouts, but it is believed that Republicans will still have enough votes in the Senate to pass it. However, just because the Senate passes the One Big Beautiful Bill Act doesn't mean it becomes law. The bill would then need to return to the House for a vote. If it passes the House, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would then become law with the president's signature. As for whether all this can be accomplished by July 4, that remains to be seen. What do Americans think of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act Most Americans don't like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including many Republicans and even self-identified MAGA supporters. The nonpartisan nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) released the results of its comprehensive polling on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on June 17. Those results showed that an overwhelming majority of Americans viewed the bill unfavorably. When KFF asked Americans if they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the results were clear: 64% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act That unfavorability number jumps to 85% of Americans who identify as Democrats Among Independent voters, 71% of Americans view the bill unfavorably But what's really interesting is the view of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act from Americans who identify themselves as Republicans: While KFF found that just 36% of Republicans view the One Big Beautiful Bill Act unfavorably, that number is massively different depending on whether the Republican identifies themselves as a MAGA supporter or a non-MAGA supporter. Yet even among MAGA supporters, more than a quarter of them—27%—view the One Big Beautiful Bill Act unfavorably. And when it comes to non-MAGA Republicans, the numbers are much worse. A full 66% of non-MAGA Republicans view the One Big Beautiful Bill Act unfavorably. If so many American voters across parties view the One Big Beautiful Bill Act unfavorably, why are Republicans rushing to pass the bill? That's a question they'll have to answer to their Republican voters during next year's Midterm elections.
