A couple of months ago, Judge Michael Cuzzo, who serves Lake and Cook counties in the Sixth Judicial District, wrote a letter to Gov. Tim Walz informing him that he would retire in October.

That letter set in motion an intricate process by which Judge Cuzzo’s replacement will be selected. It is an important process, but one that remains opaque to most members of the public.

I’ve had an extended peek behind the curtain because I serve as a non-attorney member of the Minnesota Commission on Judicial Selection, which is tasked with recommending a slate of judicial applicants from which the governor chooses the person who will take Judge Cuzzo’s place.

The Commission on Judicial Selection had its birth during the administration of Gov. Al Quie in the early 1980s. I was an editorial writer for the Star Tribune at the time, and state government was my central focus, though I cannot remember if I wrote about Quie and the commission.

But the commission idea did intrigue me – a merit selection body designed to remove politics – or at least most of it – from the appointment of state judges. Much later, when I had retired to the North Shore, I saw an appeal by Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Paul Thissen seeking applicants for the court-appointed seats on the commission. I applied and was appointed, then

reappointed to a second four-year term.

The commission has 49 members, 27 appointed by the governor and 22 appointed by the Minnesota Supreme Court. Each of the 10 judicial districts has four members, two attorneys and two non-attorneys. There also are 9 at-large members, including the chair.

The other method to become a judge, of course, is by election, which is the way Judge Cuzzo won his seat. His predecessor, Judge Ken Sandvik, did not write a retirement letter to Gov. Tim Pawlenty. Instead, Sandvik ran out the clock on his term, depriving Pawlenty and forcing the choice into the election of 2010, which Judge Cuzzo won.

Significant importance attaches to which method is used to fill this judicial vacancy. Although the bench seat Judge Cuzzo holds serves just Lake and Cook counties, voters across the entire Sixth Judicial District get to vote on candidates in an election, and there are many more voters in St. Louis and Carlton counties than in Lake and Cook.

Thus, by forcing an election, Sandvik pretty much ensured the seat would not go to an attorney

from the North Shore. By choosing to retire before his term is up, Cuzzo ensures Gov. Walz will make the initial appointment from attorneys who reside across the Sixth Judicial District, which gives attorneys from Two Harbors and Grand Marais a better chance of being selected.

Ultimately, of course, all sitting judges must stand for election if they wish to serve additional terms.

So Judge Cuzzo submitted his retirement letter. What happens now?

Informally, the letter begins the recruitment process. If a judge makes their retirement public, a retirement letter can serve the important function of letting interested attorneys know that the seat will be coming open. They then can use this time to learn about the seat, secure letters of endorsement, visit with members of the Commission on Judicial Selection and connect with affinity bar associations that help judicial candidates prepare.

I’ve had a number of really delightful, hour-long conversations with prospective applicants who were anticipating an upcoming appointment. This is in keeping with commission members’ responsibility to seek out prospective candidates and encourage them to apply as seats become

open.

Sometime soon, most likely in August when everyone’s workload allows, the Minnesota Supreme Court will certify the Cuzzo vacancy. That brings to an end all contact between candidates and commission members.

Within 10 days of Supreme Court certification, the governor notifies the commission. The commission publicly announces the vacancy and sets a deadline for applications from candidates seeking to fill the vacant seat.

Commission members from the Sixth District, augmented by a few at-large members including

the commission chair, review the application materials, including resume, letters of recommendation and detailed responses to a series of questions on the application form itself.

The commission then meets to discuss the candidates and decide which candidates the commission will interview.

Once the interview list is drawn, the most-essential work starts for commission members: due

diligence. This is the part I enjoy most.

A team of two commission members, frequently an attorney and non-attorney, is assigned a couple of candidates selected for interviews. The commission members initially contact the judges before whom the candidate has appeared, attorneys who the candidate has opposed and others who know the candidates professionally. But the people that the commission members interview as part of their diligence often go beyond the judges and attorneys. The Commission makes a searching inquiry in order to collect as complete a picture of the candidate as possible. I’ve found interviews with court administrative staff to be particularly useful.

My own practice in conducting diligence includes writing out a set of 4-5 questions, including a couple that are open-ended, and asking everyone the same set, to ensure uniformity and fairness. The questions deal with legal knowledge and abilities, demeanor, ability to handle stress and a large number of tasks, treatment of staff and people appearing in court, especially those appearing pro se or without an attorney.

Even before we’ve completed our due diligence, a date is set for the commission members involved to meet and interview the selected candidates. We meet and interview the candidates. The interviews are 15-20 minutes and 6-7 questions. I find that the candidates who do well will answer each question with succinct, on-point responses that reflect their readiness to bring to bear strong legal knowledge, organizational ability, compassion, humility and a degree of kindness in this most important role of judge.

All of this must happen within 42 days of the commission receiving notice of the vacancy from

the governor.

Following the interviews, the members report out their diligence. Then the Commission discusses the candidates and determines which candidates, usually three or four, to recommend to the governor. The finalists are notified and a press release issued. This must happen within 60 days of the vacancy declaration.

The governor, lieutenant governor, chair of the commission and judicial selection, the governor’s general counsel and director of judicial appointments then interview the finalists, and often within a week the governor names the one chosen for elevation to the bench.

In the case of Judge Cuzzo, formal appointment of his successor is expected in the fall.