The Wisconsin Supreme Court race concluded Tuesday with unprecedented $100 million in campaign spending, marking a new era in increasingly politicized state judicial contests [1]. The record-breaking race highlighted growing concerns about the impact of partisan politics and outside money on judicial independence.

Currently, states employ various methods for selecting Supreme Court justices [1]:

7 states use partisan elections14 states, including Wisconsin, use nonpartisan elections9 states rely on gubernatorial appointments2 states use legislative appointments14 states employ merit selection processes4 states use hybrid models

In Kansas, Republicans are pushing to change the state's 60-year-old appointment system to an electoral process. The proposed constitutional amendment will appear on the August 2026 primary ballot [1]. Critics warn this could lead to Wisconsin-style campaign spending and increased politicization.

'It is an elitist system, and that elitist system was designed by lawyers,' said Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, defending the proposed change [1].

The debate's urgency is highlighted by recent developments in North Carolina, where a Republican-majority appellate panel just sided with a GOP candidate seeking to invalidate 65,000 ballots in a contested Supreme Court race [1].

Pennsylvania faces similar concerns as it prepares for fall elections that could affect the court's current 5-2 Democratic majority. The state's 2023 Supreme Court race already saw $22 million in spending [1].

'It would be silly not to anticipate that in this current environment in a key state like Pennsylvania,' said Christopher Borick, director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion [1].