Susan Crawford, pragmatist

Lubar Center Director Derek Mosley interviews Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford at Marquette University Law School on Feb. 28, 2025. Photograph by Alexandria Staubach.

By Alexandria Staubach

Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford would not hint at what her position on pending cases would be if elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, but she wasn’t shy about a body of professional work that demonstrates her values.
 
Crawford told a packed house at Marquette University Law School on Friday that during her tenure as a civil litigator she represented the League of Women Voters, physicians at Planned Parenthood Wisconsin, and educators fighting Act 10, the law that largely gutted collective bargaining for public employees in the state. Crawford also highlighted her work as an administrator in Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources in Gov. Jim Doyle’s administration.
 
She said those fights on behalf of her civil clients led her to the judiciary in 2018. She often found success in circuit court, but then the Supreme Court “would ask questions that were not based on the law” and that “really (got) into political questions.”
 
Crawford’s remarks occurred during a “Get to Know You” forum moderated by Derek Mosley, director of the law school’s Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education. A recording of the forum can be found here.
 
Crawford called out her opponent, Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Brad Schimel, when saying she thinks “it’s really important to adhere to the judicial code and not comment on pending cases.” She accused Schimel of openly saying “there’s nothing wrong with” Wisconsin’s 1849 law on abortion.
 
She said she has “really refrained” from taking any stance on pending litigation and skirted an audience question asking her position on the decline of diversity, equity, and inclusion at the federal level and the potential for litigation in that area.
 
“It’s going to be up to the parties and the lawyers to decide if there is a state court role to play,” she said, calling the courts “reactive not proactive.”
 
Crawford described her judicial philosophy as “pragmatism,” which she said allows her to “apply the laws to protect the people of the state.”
 
Schimel claimed originalism as his judicial philosophy at a Lubar Center forum last week. Originalism is the view that a constitution or law should be interpreted by today’s jurists in a way they think the writers of the document intended; they act like historians to give the words their perceived original meaning.
 
Three other Supreme Court justices claim originalism, meaning that Schimel's election to the court would make it the majority view.
 
Crawford said that to her, “originalism is a starting point for analysis,” but asking “why was this law enacted” and considering its application over time informs her views. This “gives you a much deeper understanding,” said Crawford. 

Crawford’s civil litigation experience is coupled with a long career working in various roles for Doyle, when he was attorney general and then governor. “I always said, ‘yes sir, I will take up this new challenge,” said Crawford about her time working for Doyle.
 
Notwithstanding that government work, Crawford told the audience that she was “not running on a partisan agenda.” No matter the issue, she promised the crowd, she will evaluate any evidence, listen to argument, perform her own legal research, and consult with her colleagues prior to rendering every decision if she’s elected.
 
A prospective colleague, Justice Rebecca Dallet, listened from the front row.
 
Th audience asked Crawford about donations from George Soros and J.B Pritzker, the former donating $1 million and the latter donating $500,000 to the state Democratic Party, which passed the money along to Crawford’s campaign.
 
Crawford largely dodged the question about contributions to her own campaign but took the opportunity to say Schimel was taking Elon Musk’s money with obvious strings attached.
 
“Elon Musk is entering the race” and “openly saying he wants Schimel on the court to advance Trump’s agenda,” said Crawford. 
 
“I never thought I would be fighting with the world’s richest man for justice in Wisconsin,” she laughed.
 
An audience member questioned Crawford about an accusation that her election could result in a decision that would generate two U.S. House seats, based on Crawford’s appearance at a donor event earlier this year.
 
Crawford said she did attend a video call for the group Focus on Democracy but that she never discussed congressional maps nor took any questions related to them. About congressional maps, “I have never taken a position publicly or privately and don’t know what my position would be,” she said.