Jill Karofsky
2020 - Present
2030
5
Jill Karofsky is a judge of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. She assumed office on August 1, 2020. Her current term ends on July 31, 2030.
Karofsky ran for election for judge of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. She won in the general election on April 7, 2020.
Karofsky first became a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court through a nonpartisan election. She was first elected to the court in 2020 to the seat vacated by Daniel Kelly. Though the office is officially nonpartisan, Karofsky was affiliated with the Democratic Party at the time of the election.[1] To read more about judicial selection in Wisconsin, click here. On July 1, 2025, Karofsky succeeded Ann Walsh Bradley as chief justice.[2]
Biography
Education
Karofsky earned a bachelor's degree from Duke University. She holds a master's degree and J.D. from the University of Wisconsin.[3]
Career
Karofsky was the education director and director of human resources and counsel for the National Conference of Bar Examiners from 2001 to 2010. She was the executive director for the Wisconsin Office of Crime Victim Services at the time of her election.[3]
Elections
2020
See also: Wisconsin Supreme Court elections, 2020
General election
General election for Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jill Karofsky defeated incumbent Daniel Kelly in the general election for Wisconsin Supreme Court on April 7, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ |  | Jill Karofsky (Nonpartisan) | 55.2 | 855,573 |
 | Daniel Kelly (Nonpartisan) | 44.7 | 693,134 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.1 | 990 | ||
| Total votes: 1,549,697 | |||
 = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
Nonpartisan primary for Wisconsin Supreme Court
Incumbent Daniel Kelly and Jill Karofsky defeated Edward A. Fallone in the primary for Wisconsin Supreme Court on February 18, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Daniel Kelly (Nonpartisan) | 50.1 | 352,876 |
| ✔ | | Jill Karofsky (Nonpartisan) | 37.2 | 261,783 |
 | Edward A. Fallone (Nonpartisan) | 12.7 | 89,184 | |
| Total votes: 703,843 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Campaign finance
2017
Wisconsin held local judicial elections in 2017. Forty-eight circuit court seats were up for election on April 4, 2017. Three seats required primaries on February 21, 2017, with the top two vote recipients for each seat advancing to the April 4 general election. Thirty-seven seats up for election in 2017 were unopposed.[4] Jill Karofsky defeated Marilyn Townsend in the general election for the Branch 12 seat on the Dane County Circuit Court.
| Dane County Circuit Court, Branch 12 General Election, 2017 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
 Jill Karofsky |
57.54% | 50,577 |
| Marilyn Townsend | 42.21% | 37,108 |
| Write-in votes | 0.25% | 218 |
| Total Votes | 87,903 | |
| Source: Dane County Clerk's Office, "2017 Spring Election," accessed April 4, 2017 | ||
Selection method
For more information about judicial selection processes in each state, click here.
Endorsements
Karofsky's endorsements included the following individuals:[5]
- Dane County Circuit Court Judge Everett Mitchell
- Court of Appeals Judge Brian Blanchard
- Former Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle (D)
- Former Wisconsin Gov. Tony Earl (D)
- Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney
Campaign themes
2020
Ballotpedia survey responses
See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection
Jill Karofsky did not complete Ballotpedia's 2020 Candidate Connection survey.
Campaign website
Karofsky's campaign website stated the following:
| “ |
I have spent my career in the law working to help crime victims and to protect our rights, and now I’m running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court because we need to get our state and our country back on the right track. I’m a judge, I’ve been a local and state prosecutor, I directed the state’s Office of Crime Victim Services. No one knows better than me how important it is to have a legal system that works. Today, too many judges see themselves as on one political team or another. But I think we need strong leaders who will put our strong Wisconsin political tradition of independent and honest courts first. I believe in Wisconsin. I believe in our history of great public schools, protecting our beautiful natural resources, and protecting civil rights for all. As a prosecutor and a judge, I, have deep experience in state courtrooms, and have spent a career standing up for our rights and fighting to protect victims. Now, I need your help to win this race for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Believe me, I know what it’s like to work hard and to run hard. I’ve completed two Ironman races, and now I run 50-mile ultra-marathons. I was a Division I athlete, and then I graduated with two degrees from UW-Madison. In my career prosecuting violent criminals, working as the top assistant attorney general on violence against women cases, and running the state’s victim services programs, I learned a lot about what works and doesn’t work in our system. I know that our judicial system is built on independent judges, not a system in which it matters what political team you’re on. So now I see the corroding effect of big money on our judicial system. It’s time to restore a sense of justice and honor to our legal system. I will follow the law, and I will protect our values. My dad, Peter, was a local pediatrician. My mom, Judy, was one of the first women in Wisconsin to serve as a city mayor. This country has made tremendous strides in extending equal rights to all, and I’m inspired by the example of my father, and how he cares for children every day, and by my mother and the groundbreaking path she forged. We can’t go backwards, and it’s distressing to me that rather than respecting our rights, we now see a moment in which political forces seek to roll back the advances in civil rights we’ve made in the last few generations. More than anything, our courts are about constitutional rights. We will serve the needs of crime victims, we will stand up for racial justice and civil rights, we will protect the right to marriage equality, and we will never allow for the rights of women to be rolled back. I look forward to getting around the state and carrying that message to voters in every corner of Wisconsin. Please join me on this journey. I look forward to staying in touch.[6][7] |
” |
2017
Karofsky's campaign website included the following themes:
| “ |
The Judicial branch of government functions as a check and balance on overreach by the other two branches of government. I believe Judges must have the courage to make tough decisions, free from bias and without weighing political pressures or public opinion. Judges must respect their role in the system and they, too, must not overreach. Judges must issue decisions and make rulings that are clear, understandable, and firmly based in the law. Further, I believe strongly that impartiality is the cornerstone of our judicial system. Judges must put aside their personal beliefs, listen carefully, treat all before them with respect, and strive to achieve equal justice under the law. Wisconsin has a long tradition, which I respect, of a non- partisan judiciary. The Judicial Code of Ethics which governs the actions of judges and judicial candidates is clear: judges should not run partisan political campaigns, nor should they interject partisanship into their campaigns by promising to favor any set of beliefs, progressive or conservative, Republican, Democrat, or Independent. The Legislative branch has the power of the purse; the Executive branch executes the law. From where does the power and authority of the judicial branch arise? From the trust and confidence of the people. When that trust is diminished or undermined, it is democracy itself that is in danger. That is why we must elect Judges who have the courage, the ability, the knowledge of the law, and the integrity to decide cases without fear or favor. Throughout my career I have shown that dedication to the law, to fairness, and to the impartial administration of justice. That is the kind of judge I will be.[8][7] |
” |
| —Jill Karofsky (2017) | ||
Noteworthy cases
Wisconsin Supreme Court finds state legislative maps in violation of the state constitution (2023)
Justice Karofsky sided with the majority opinion on this case. In a 4-3 decision on Dec. 22, 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the state’s legislative maps violated the state constitution and ordered the state to draw new maps for the 2024 elections. The justice wrote the following in their majority opinion:[9]
| “ |
We hold that the contiguity requirements in Article IV, Sections 4 and 5 mean what they say: Wisconsin's state legislative districts must be composed of physically adjoining territory. The constitutional text and our precedent support this common-sense interpretation of contiguity. Because the current state legislative districts contain separate, detached territory and therefore violate the constitution's contiguity requirements, we enjoin the Wisconsin Elections Commission from using the current legislative maps in future elections ... Because we enjoin the current state legislative district maps from future use, remedial maps must be drawn prior to the 2024 elections.[10][7] |
” |
The original petitioners argued that Wisconsin’s legislative districts violated multiple provisions of the state constitution, including equal protection, freedom of speech and association, separation of powers, and contiguous legislative districts. The state's legislative maps were ordered to be enacted by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April 2022 after the governor vetoed them and the state legislature failed to override that veto.[9]
Articles:
Wisconsin Supreme Court affirms agency authority to regulate state water resources (2021)
The Wisconsin Supreme Court on July 8 issued decisions in two environmental cases that had pitted the state legislature against the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in a disagreement over which government entity has the authority to regulate water pollution and irrigation practices. In both cases, the court held 4-2 that the DNR is authorized to restrict permits in order to protect the state’s water resources.[11][12][13]
The pair of cases, both initiated by Clean Wisconsin Inc. and Pleasant Lake Management District, centered on Wisconsin Act 21—a 2011 law that limits state agency authority by prohibiting state agencies from taking actions not specifically authorized by the state legislature.[11]
The first case concerned an administrative law judge's (ALJ) order that the DNR limit the size of a dairy herd causing nearby groundwater contamination. The DNR under then-Governor Scott Walker (R) did not enforce the ALJ’s directive, arguing that Act 21 prohibited the agency from carrying out the order.[11][12]
A Dane County Circuit Court judge in 2016 affirmed the DNR's authority to limit the size of the dairy herd to address water pollution. The DNR appealed the decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The current DNR under Governor Tony Evers (D) changed its position and had since claimed regulatory authority in the case.[11][12]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the circuit court's decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Jill Karofsky stated "we conclude that an agency may rely upon a grant of authority that is explicit but broad when undertaking agency action, and such an explicit but broad grant of authority complies with [Act 21]."[11][12]
In the second case, challengers sued the DNR seeking stricter enforcement of regulations regarding large-scale water withdrawals for irrigation. Challengers claimed that the agency failed to consider the cumulative negative impact on water levels in nearby lakes and streams when it issued permits for nine high-capacity wells. As in the previous case, the DNR argued that Act 21 prevented the agency from considering the cumulative impact of the new wells.[11][13]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court again affirmed the circuit court's decision in the case, holding that the DNR erroneously claimed that it lacked regulatory authority. Writing for the majority, Justice Rebecca Dallet stated, "The DNR's authority to consider the environmental effects of proposed high capacity wells, while broad, is nevertheless explicitly permitted by statute."[11][13]
Chief Justice Annette Ziegler joined Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky in both majority opinions. Justice Brian Hagedorn did not participate in the case.[11][12][13]
Justices Rebecca Bradley and Patience Roggensack dissented, arguing in part: “Elevating its environmental policy preferences over the legislature's prerogative to reclaim its constitutional authority, the majority distorts the plain language of [Act 21] to achieve its own ends."[11][12][13]
State supreme court judicial selection in Wisconsin
- See also: Judicial selection in Wisconsin
The seven justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court are elected in statewide nonpartisan elections. Judges serve ten-year terms, and to remain on the court, they must run for re-election after their term expires. Only one seat may be elected in any year, and more than two candidates for each seat must file to have a primary.[14][15]
Qualifications
To serve on the supreme court, a judge must be:
- licensed to practice law in Wisconsin for a minimum of five years immediately prior to election or appointment
- under the age of 70.[16]
Chief justice
The chief justice of the court is selected by peer vote for a term of two years.
Vacancies
In the event of a vacancy on the court, the governor has the power and duty to appoint an individual to the vacancy. The governor screens judicial applicants using an advisory council on judicial selection. The council recommends three to five candidates to the governor, although the governor is not bound by their recommendations. The appointed justice must then stand for election in the first subsequent year in which no other justice's term expires.[15][14][17]
The map below highlights how vacancies are filled in state supreme courts across the country.
See also
External links
|
Candidate Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Officeholder Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Personal |
Footnotes
- ↑ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "Liberal Jill Karofsky wins Wisconsin Supreme Court election, defeating conservative justice Daniel Kelly," April 13, 2020
- ↑ WIS Politics, "Wisconsin Supreme Court: Justice Ann Walsh Bradley elected as chief justice," April 3, 2025
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Elect Jill Karofsky, "Bio," accessed March 7, 2017
- ↑ Wisconsin Elections Commission, "Spring 2017 Election," accessed January 3, 2017
- ↑ Elect Jill Karofsky, "Endorsements," accessed March 7, 2017
- ↑ Jill Karofsky's 2020 campaign website, "Home," accessed January 22, 2020
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Elect Jill Karofsky, "My Judicial Philosophy," accessed March 7, 2017 (dead link)
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Democracy Docket, "Wisconsin Legislative Redistricting Challenge (Clarke)," accessed January 2, 2024
- ↑ Supreme Court of Wisconsin, "Case No. 2023AP1399-OA," accessed January 2, 2024
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 Wisconsin Public Radio, "Wisconsin Supreme Court Affirms DNR Authority To Restrict, Deny Farm Permits To Protect Water," July 8, 2021
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 Wisconsin Supreme Court, "Clean Wisconsin, Inc., Lynda Cochart, Amy Cochart, Roger DeJardin, Sandra Winnemueller and Chad Cochart v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources," July 8, 2021
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 Wisconsin Supreme Court, "Clean Wisconsin, Inc. and Pleasant Lake Management District v. Wisconsin Departement of Natural Resources," July 8, 2021
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 National Center for State Courts, "Methods of Judicial Selection," accessed August 12, 2021
- ↑ 15.0 15.1 Wisconsin State Legislature, "Wisconsin Constitution," accessed September 19, 2014 (Article VII, Section 4: pg.10) Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "section4" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Wisconsin State Legislature, "Wisconsin Constitution," accessed September 19, 2014 (Article VII, Section 24: pg.11)
- ↑ Wisconsin State Legislature, "8.50 - Special elections," accessed April 19, 2023
| ||||||||||
Federal courts:
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin
State courts:
Wisconsin Supreme Court • Wisconsin Court of Appeals • Wisconsin Circuit Courts • Wisconsin Municipal Courts
State resources:
Courts in Wisconsin • Wisconsin judicial elections • Judicial selection in Wisconsin
 |
State of Wisconsin Madison (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
