This year, there are a number of challengers running against judges in the Third Judicial District — which has 11 counties including yours and mine. So, how do we know whether to vote for the incumbent or the challenger?

Consider this: Incumbent judges have been through a rigorous and competitive vetting process, before finally being appointed by the governor. Challengers are lawyers who either did not subject themselves to the rigorous selection process, or did so, but didn’t make the cut.

Incumbents advanced through multiple phases of interviews and scrutiny by a nonpartisan, 13-member judicial selection committee to become one of five finalists. They met qualifications determined by the committee, including integrity, maturity, health (if job related), judicial temperament, legal knowledge, ability, experience and community service; their references and colleagues were interviewed. They were also screened by the Department of Revenue, the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility Board and the clerk of the Supreme Court. Finally, they were interviewed by the governor and selected to be appointed a judge.

Now, we get to be the judge. Our vote decides whether the incumbent remains judge or the challenger is elected. My verdict is for the incumbents.

Francy B. Hall

Owatonna