Wisconsin’s liberal-controlled Supreme Court struck down a 175-year-old abortion law in a ruling that Democrats are already celebrating as a triumph for abortion access, while Republicans condemn it as judicial activism gone too far.
Key Takeaways
- The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that the state’s 1849 law does not ban abortion, interpreting it as a feticide law rather than an abortion ban
- Liberal justices determined that comprehensive abortion regulations passed over the last 50 years effectively repealed the 19th-century law
- Conservative justices strongly dissented, with Justice Rebecca Bradley calling it judicial overreach that makes “four lawyers sitting on the state’s highest court more powerful than the People’s representatives.”
- The ruling restores legal clarity for abortion access in Wisconsin following uncertainty created by the 2022 Dobbs decision
- Future battles over abortion rights in Wisconsin will likely intensify during the 2026 midterm elections, when the governor’s office and legislative seats are contested
Liberal Court Majority Redefines 175-Year-Old Law
In a decisive 4-3 ruling that breaks along ideological lines, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has determined that the state’s controversial 1849 abortion law does not constitute a ban on the procedure. The liberal-controlled court’s majority opinion, delivered on July 2, 2025, effectively secures abortion access in the state following years of uncertainty after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. The ruling represents a significant victory for abortion rights advocates and a major setback for pro-life conservatives who had believed the 1849 statute would restrict abortion access in Wisconsin.
Justice Rebecca Dallet, writing for the majority, argued that the Wisconsin Legislature had effectively nullified the 1849 law through decades of subsequent abortion regulations. “… this case is about giving effect to 50 years’ worth of laws passed by the legislature about virtually every aspect of abortion, including where, when, and how health-care providers may lawfully perform abortions,” wrote Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Dallet.
This week marks three years since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal right to abortion and shifting the fight for reproductive rights to the states. https://t.co/D9MIvWbbWX
— WKOW 27 News (@WKOW) June 26, 2025
Fierce Conservative Backlash Against “Judicial Activism”
The court’s conservative minority issued scathing dissents, accusing their liberal colleagues of overstepping judicial boundaries to legislate from the bench. Justice Rebecca Bradley delivered a particularly pointed rebuke, claiming the majority “erases a law it does not like, making four lawyers sitting on the state’s highest court more powerful than the People’s representatives in the legislature.”
Similarly, Justice Annette Ziegler condemned the ruling as “a jaw-dropping exercise of judicial will” and argued that “the majority picks and chooses which abortion statutes remain in force.”
The majority’s reinterpretation of the 1849 law as a feticide statute rather than an abortion ban follows similar reasoning from Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper, who ruled in 2023 that the law was never intended to criminalize voluntary abortion procedures performed by medical professionals. This interpretation allowed Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers to resume services last summer after a period of suspension following the Dobbs decision, but today’s ruling provides much stronger legal certainty for abortion access in Wisconsin.
Political Implications and Future Battles
The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s majority opinion includes language that deliberately leaves the door open for legislative action, with Justice Dallet noting: “The legislature, as the people’s representatives, remains free to change the laws concerning abortion in the future.”
However, Wisconsin’s current divided government—with Republicans controlling the legislature and Democrat Tony Evers in the governor’s mansion—makes immediate legislative changes highly unlikely.
The court concluded that “comprehensive legislation enacted over the last 50 years regulating in detail the ‘who, what, where, when, and how’ of abortion so thoroughly covers the entire subject of abortion that it was meant as a substitute for the 19th century near-total ban on abortion.”
This ruling, while significant, is unlikely to end the abortion debate in Wisconsin. With the 2026 midterm elections approaching, when both the governor’s office and numerous legislative seats will be contested, abortion access will undoubtedly remain a central campaign issue. Today’s decision simply sets the stage for the next phase of this contentious battle, with conservatives now forced to pursue legislative remedies rather than judicial enforcement of the 1849 law. President Trump and conservative lawmakers nationwide continue to advocate for states’ rights on abortion policy, maintaining that these decisions should be made by elected officials rather than appointed judges.
