ReformingGovernment.org Facebook X / Twitter
Wisconsin Supreme Court

2025 Term
Scorecards.

Seven justices evaluated across five constitutional fidelity metrics using a transparent 50/50 composite model.

Scoring Framework

Process, not outcomes.

Every justice's composite score combines two equal weights: rigorous evaluation of judicial reasoning, and alignment in the term's most consequential decisions.

50%

5-Metric Methodology

Adherence to Precedent, Separation of Powers, Textualism & Originalism, Judicial Restraint, and Individual Liberty — weighted across every opinion authored or joined.

+
50%

Critical Cases Alignment

Each justice's vote in the term's ten highest-stakes decisions is measured against constitutional principles — ensuring real-world consequence carries proportionate weight.

2025 Term

Justice Scorecards.

Rebecca Grassl Bradley

Rebecca Grassl Bradley

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice

96.40%
Annette Ziegler

Annette Kingsland Ziegler

Chief Justice (until April 2025)

95.30%
Brian Hagedorn

Brian Hagedorn

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice

84.85%
Janet Protasiewicz

Janet C. Protasiewicz

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice

61.70%
Rebecca Dallet

Rebecca Frank Dallet

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice

60.80%
Jill Karofsky

Jill J. Karofsky

Chief Justice (from July 2025)

59.60%
Ann Walsh Bradley

Ann Walsh Bradley

Chief Justice (May–June 2025)

59.45%
Susan Crawford

Susan Crawford

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice

N/A
Critical Cases

The ten decisions that defined the term.

These cases carry 50% of each justice's composite score, ensuring that performance in high-stakes decisions carries real weight.

5–2 Split

Evers v. Marklein

Legislative oversight authority

5–2 Split

WMC v. DNR

Agency rulemaking authority

7–0 Unanimous

Kaul v. Legislature

Separation of powers

4–3 Split

Kaul v. Urmanski

Abortion & implied repeal

7–0 Unanimous

Legislature v. DPI

Gubernatorial veto power

4–3 Split

LeMieux v. Evers

Gubernatorial veto power

4–3 Split

Brown v. WEC

Election administration

7–0 Unanimous

WEC v. LeMahieu

Election administration

4–3 Split

Catholic Charities v. LIRC

Religious liberty

7–0 Unanimous

SEIU v. WERC

Collective bargaining

CaseIssueSplit R.G.B.ZieglerHagedorn Prota.DalletKarofskyA.W.B.
Evers v. MarkleinLegislative Oversight5–2✓✓~*✗✗✗✗
WMC v. DNRAgency Authority5–2✓✓✗✗✗✗✗
Kaul v. LegislatureSeparation of Powers7–0✓✓✓✓✓✓✓
Kaul v. UrmanskiAbortion4–3✓✓✓✗✗✗✗
Legislature v. DPIGubernatorial Veto7–0✓✓✓✓✓✓✓
LeMieux v. EversGubernatorial Veto4–3✓✓✓✗✗✗✗
Brown v. WECElection Admin.4–3✓✓✓✗✗✗✗
WEC v. LeMahieuElection Admin.7–0✓✓✓✓✓✓✓
Catholic Charities v. LIRCReligious Liberty4–3✓✓✓✗✗✗✗
SEIU v. WERCCollective Bargaining7–0✓✓✓✓✓✓✓
Alignment 10/1010/108/10 4/104/104/104/10

*Hagedorn concurred in part and dissented in part in Evers v. Marklein.  ✓ = aligned with constitutional principles  ✗ = not aligned