[4] In 2009, the United States Supreme Court decided Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., holding 5–4 that a campaign expenditure of over $3 million by a corporate litigant to influence the election of a judge to the court that would hear its case, although legal, was an "extreme fact" that created a "probability of bias", thus requiring the judge to be recused from hearing the case.

[6] Wisconsin had adopted a limit of $1,000 for campaign contributions to judges, but it was unclear when mandatory recusal was required.

[7] Instead, during its 2009–2010 term and by a 4–3 vote, the Court adopted a rule that recusal is not required based solely on any endorsement or receipt of a lawful campaign contribution from a party or entity involved in the proceeding, and that a judge does not need to seek recusal where it would be based solely on a party in the case sponsoring an independent expenditure or issue advocacy communication in favor of the judge.

[8] Their demand was targeted at the newest justice, Janet Protasiewicz, and was paired with a threat from the Republican Assembly speaker to begin an impeachment.

At issue was the allegation that Protasiewicz had pre-judged pending redistricting cases, because she had remarked during the campaign that Wisconsin's legislative maps were "rigged".

Prosser, Bradley, and the other justices (except N. Patrick Crooks) were discussing the following day's decision that would overturn a ruling blocking the Wisconsin collective bargaining law.

[11] Ethics charges brought against Prosser based on Bradley's allegations were never adjudicated due to the lack of a quorum on the Court after recusals.

The 2015 amendment changed the chief justice role to a two year term, elected by a majority of the members of the court.

[15] Immediately after passage of the amendment, the conservative members of the court elected Patience Roggensack to replace Abrahamson as chief justice.

[17] In May 2020, in response to a lawsuit brought by the Republican-led state legislature, the Court ruled 4–3 to strike down an order issued by Secretary-designate of the Department of Health Services Andrea Palm, which extended the stay-at-home order previously issued by Governor Tony Evers.

[19] The deciding vote to strike down the Secretary-designate's order was by Daniel Kelly, who had recently lost his bid for re-election to Jill Karofsky.

[25][26] At the outset of the case, the court's three conservatives, along with the swing vote Hagedorn, established a novel legal concept that all parties should pursue the "least changes" to the existing map necessary to bring it into compliance with the applicable laws.

Without further deliberation, in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's action, Hagedorn switched his vote to the Republican plan, although it suffered from an identical process defect.

On April 7, 2020, incumbent conservative justice Daniel Kelly lost re-election to liberal Dane County circuit judge Jill Karofsky.

The election was held during the coronavirus pandemic, forcing many voters to choose between voting by mail, waiting in long lines for hours, or not participating at all.

Liberal Milwaukee County circuit judge Janet Protasiewicz defeated conservative former Supreme Court justice Daniel Kelly at the April 4, 2023, general election.

[39] Circuit judges Jennifer Dorow and Everett Mitchell also ran, but they were eliminated in the February 21 primary.

[43] Circuit judges Susan M. Crawford and Brad Schimel will compete in the April 1 general election, in a race that will likely decide the ideological balance of the court for the next year.