*If you are in the position to support my work, I have a [patreon](https://www.patreon.com/RusticGorilla),...
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/keep_track by /u/rusticgorilla on 2025-03-05 12:29:54+00:00.

If you are in the position to support my work, I have a patreon, venmo, and a paypal set up. Just three dollars a month makes a huge difference! These posts will never be paywalled.

Subscribe to Keep Track’s Substack (RSS link) or monthly digest. Also on Bluesky.

Keep Track’s coverage of the Trump administration will resume next week. Today, we will look at state elections and legislation, which often get overlooked during times of tumultuous national news.

State Supreme Courts

Voters in Wisconsin are a month away from a pivotal election that will determine ideological control of the state’s Supreme Court (justices are technically nonpartisan - they do not appear on the ballot with an associated political party). The race to replace incumbent liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, who is retiring after 30 years on the court, is between two lower court judges: Susan Crawford, who aligns with the Democratic party, and Brad Schimel, who aligns with the Republican party. A Crawford win would maintain the liberals’ 4-3 majority for three more years, while a Schimel win would flip control of the court to the conservatives.

The candidates:

  • Crawford is a Dane County circuit court judge who has served as an assistant attorney general in the Wisconsin Department of Justice and as an administrator in the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. As a private practice attorney, she argued challenges to the Republican legislature’s voter suppression measures, defended labor rights and unions, and represented Planned Parenthood to preserve abortion access.
  • Schimel is a Waukesha County circuit court judge who served as the Attorney General of Wisconsin from 2015 to 2019. During this time he defended provisions that restricted abortion access, tried to overturn the Affordable Care Act, and led the Republican legislature’s successful effort to end federal court oversight of partisan gerrymandering. Schimel attended a Trump rally in 2020, despite ethics rules barring judges from participating in partisan political events, and traveled to Washington, D.C., for Trump’s inauguration in January.

According to recent polling—albeit by the conservative Institute for Reforming Government—Schimel currently leads Crawford by five percentage points.

Outside interests have taken notice of the election’s significance, pouring money into the race in the hopes of swaying the 20% of voters who are still undecided. One of those investors is none other than Elon Musk, fresh off his lucrative purchase of the U.S. presidency and apparently determined to buy every election of consequence going forward. As of last week, “Musk’s America PAC has spent $2.2 million on get-out-the-vote efforts and digital ads, while another group funded by him, Building America’s Future, has spent $2 million on ads and other forms of media attacking Crawford” for being “soft on crime.”

“I’ve been tracking these races for many years,” says Douglas Keith, senior counsel in the Judiciary Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. “I’ve never seen this much interest in a state supreme court election coming directly from the White House.” […]

“At this point, the difference between spending on the right and spending on the left is noteworthy,” Keith says. He estimates $18 million has been spent supporting Schimel and $8 million supporting Crawford from their campaigns and outside allies. “It seems like voters are probably seeing a lot more ads in favor of Schimel or attacking Crawford than they are the other way around.”

State supreme court elections are massively important because justices are often the last line of defense against anti-democratic bills passed by Republican legislatures. Take Kansas, for example, where the state supreme court has upheld a constitutional right to abortion (via personal autonomy) and to adequate and equitable school funding. Republican lawmakers, unhappy with the court’s oversight, are moving this year to amend the constitution to allow justices to be elected in a partisan contest rather than nominated by a nonpartisan commission and appointed by the governor (Democrat Laura Kelly). New legislation, SCR 1611, would put the question to voters in next year’s election.

Rashane Hamby, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas, said the proposed resolution would inject politics into the courts and erode public trust in the judiciary. The change would threaten the rule of law, weaken separation of powers, and allow special interests to influence the highest court.

“The Supreme Court should not be for sale to the highest bidder,” Hamby said. “If this passes, it will be a radical departure from Kansas’ longstanding commitment to judicial independence.”

Public assistance

Red states across the country are ramping up their efforts to limit public assistance programs that keep the poorest Americans from starving or dying from preventable illnesses, mirroring the GOP’s budget reconciliation strategy endorsed by President Trump.

Medicaid

Medicaid is a joint state and federal health insurance program for low-income people, currently covering nearly 80 million Americans. With the approval of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, states can impose restrictions on eligibility, costs, and care. Previously, under the Biden administration, all proposals to impose work requirements on Medicaid recipients were denied or rescinded, leaving Georgia as the only state with a work requirement waiver in effect (due to a court order).

Some Republican-led states are betting, probably correctly, that they will have better luck getting work requirements approved under the new Trump administration.

  • Idaho is debating multiple bills that would affect Medicaid enrollment: HB 138, which passed the House last month, would require the state to implement work requirements for all non-disabled adults without young children (under 6 years of age) and institute a cap on Medicaid expansion enrollment, or else automatically repeal the Medicaid expansion approved by voters. HB 345, introduced last week, would impose work requirements without the threat of repealing the state’s Medicaid expansion.
  • Iowa lawmakers are considering a bill, HSB 248, that would require the state to implement work requirements for all non-disabled adults without young children on Medicaid, or else (a) discontinue the Medicaid expansion or (b) implement an alternative plan to cut Medicaid enrollment.
  • The Indiana Senate last month approved SB 2, a bill to impose work requirements for all non-disabled adults without young children on the state’s Medicaid expansion program and institute a cap on enrollment at 500,000 individuals. The program currently has more than 760,000 enrollees.
  • New Hampshire Republicans are advancing SB 134, which directs the state’s Department of Health and Human Services to resubmit a request for a waiver to institute Medicaid work requirements to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
  • The governments of Arkansas, [Ohio](https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/med…

Content cut off. Read original on https://old.reddit.com/r/Keep_Track/comments/1j41yq2/republicans_advance_trumps_agenda_in_state/