The nonprofit Building America’s Future — which is funded by President Donald Trump’s senior advisor Elon Musk — has spent $1.6 million on television advertisements that benefit conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice candidate Brad Schimel.
Schimel’s opponent, liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court justice candidate Susan Crawford said she believes Elon Musk is directly involved with the decision to fund these advertisements.
“This is a Musk organization, and it specifically exists to get involved in political issues,” Crawford said. “So I have no question that he’s frankly involved in this particularly since he has personally been tweeting about this race in support of Brad Schimel.”
Three days after the 2025 inauguration, Musk posted on X telling his followers to vote Republican in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race to prevent voting fraud.
Though Wisconsin law limits how much funding political campaigns can receive from corporations, federal law under Citizens United does not limit how much corporations can independently spend as long as they do not explicitly endorse a candidate’s campaign, University of Wisconsin professor of political science Kenneth Mayer said.
“Unless an ad explicitly says ‘vote for this person’ or ‘don’t vote for that person’, it’s trivially easy to run communications that don’t even count as campaign ads,” Mayer said.
Ads that do not explicitly endorse candidates nor are affiliated with their campaigns are often called “issue ads,” Mayer said.
Issue ads were first highlighted as a loophole in funding Wisconsin candidates during the 2008 state Supreme Court election in which Justice Louis Butler lost reelection after being targeted by independent groups’ deceptive ads, according to FactCheck.org.
“I guess now we’re going on 17 years if we use 2008 as the demarcation that the politics of these races has become much more partisan — much nastier,” Mayer said.
Mayer said the $1.6 million Musk has spent so far will be insignificant to the total amount of money spent by all the independent groups who will contribute to helping Schimel’s campaign.
Crawford said that in comparison to Schimel, her campaign has a broader base of funding support.
“I’ve received a very broad base of contributions both from within Wisconsin and outside the state of Wisconsin,” Crawford said. “I have received a lot of support from the Democratic Party of Wisconsin which, in turn, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin has received … some very generous contributions from people.”
In January, liberal philanthropist George Soros donated $1 million to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin which later donated $2 million to Crawford’s campaign.
Schimel said Feb. 26 that Musk’s donation does not at all equate to Soros’s indirect donation to Crawford.
Mayer said Schimel’s comment was a contribution to the frequent antisemitic rhetoric against the Jewish philanthropist who survived the Holocaust.
“Brad Schimel has said that George Soros’ money is worse than Elon Musk’s money,” Mayer said. “That is an antisemitic slur … George Soros has become this boogeyman in right-wing circles and it is almost entirely because he’s Jewish … It is outrageous, and it is offensive that this is happening.”
Mayer said the Musk-funded attack ads could be very effective in shaping the way people vote.
Wisconsin Supreme Court races are legally nonpartisan, but Crawford said Musk has emphasized partisanship in this election because he has endorsed Schimel to protect a Republican agenda. In comparison, Crawford said she runs a nonpartisan campaign.
Mayer said candidates in this election, and Wisconsin elections in general, have received large donations partly because Wisconsin is a swing state and currently has a narrow 4-3 liberal majority on the state Supreme Court.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear many significant cases on redistricting, abortion, union rights and public employees, Mayer said.
“The stakes are quite high, so I guess the thing to keep in mind is don’t get too hung up on what the candidates have raised and spent because there’s going to be a huge amount of money coming in,” Mayer said.
Crawford said Schimel has previously used money to his advantage in his role as Wisconsin attorney general.
Schimel accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from pharmaceutical manufacturers but refused to join lawsuits to hold those companies accountable for the opioid epidemic despite almost every other state’s attorney general joining a national lawsuit against those companies, Crawford said.
“Brad Schimel did not,” Crawford said. “He sat on his hands and refused to get involved in that lawsuit. 71 out of 72 counties in Wisconsin had passed a referendum to join that lawsuit, but Brad Schimel was holding back. And I think again we can connect the dots. It was because he was receiving that financial support.”
Schimel’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court justice election will be held April 1.
