For the first time in years, Minnesotans will have more than one choice for judge in multiple races on the ballot this fall.

Nine races for judgeships out of 103 total have more than one candidate registered to run, including two contested seats on the Minnesota Supreme Court. Last election cycle, only one judge in the entire state faced a challenger on the ballot.

Even with a handful of contested races this fall, it’s unlikely any will rise to the high-profile judicial battles seen next door in Wisconsin, where a 2023 race that flipped the state’s high court from a conservative to a liberal majority attracted more than $50 million in spending.

Several factors keep the tone tamped down in judge races in Minnesota, including institutional norms, a historically weak bench of challengers and a lack of high-profile cases before the state’s highest court that have spurred opposition, said Herbert Kritzer, professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota Law School.

“Groups have not felt that they have a need to get involved in Minnesota Supreme Court elections, and that’s because Minnesota has not had to make any controversial decisions on abortion, and there’s not been significant tort reform legislation challenged before the court,” said Kritzer, who has studied judicial retention across the country. “There’s also no death penalty in Minnesota; that becomes a very hot topic in many other states.”

In Minnesota, judges run for six-year terms to the bench in nonpartisan elections, but it’s rare in the state for someone to win an open election for a judgeship. Most judges retire partway through their term and allow the governor to appoint their replacement. Once appointed, the judge must run in the next general election more than one year after their appointment.

Incumbent judges are noted on the ballot, but political affiliations are not. While candidates can seek political party endorsements, a judicial code of conduct in the state discourages many political activities, and discourages candidates from discussing their views on issues or how they might rule on a case. Many candidates in Minnesota stick to that code.

That’s very different from Wisconsin, said Kritzer, where candidates run in open elections more often than Minnesota and are often strongly associated with a political party. In the 2023 race for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, candidates gave their views on the 2020 election results and abortion.

Timing could also be a factor. Minnesota’s judicial contests line up with the state’s regular election calendar, meaning they’re on the ballot with other high-profile races in November. Wisconsin’s judicial races are in the spring, giving each contest more attention.

In other states, business groups frustrated by Supreme Court decisions on regulations have often been behind efforts to recruit and back strong candidates for judicial races, but that hasn’t happened in Minnesota, said Kritzer.

There is a challenger to Minnesota Supreme Court Associate Justice Karl Procaccini, who served as Gov. Tim Walz’s general counsel during his first term in office and taught at the University of St. Thomas School of Law. Walz appointed Procaccini to the court last August, putting him on the ballot in November.

“There was some speculation that someone would put up a challenger because he was so involved in pandemic decisions,” said Kritzer.

Procaccini is facing Matthew Hanson, a Prior Lake attorney who has worked in trusts, estates and commercial litigation. Hanson was the lone challenger to any judge in 2022, and that’s part of why he’s running again.

“Democracy requires a choice, and when you can’t vote for someone else, why even vote?” he said. “I wanted to bring more attention generally to judicial elections.”

Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Natalie Hudson is also facing a challenge, from Stephen Emery, an attorney who has run for other state offices. There’s one contested Court of Appeals race and six contests for district judges that have more than one candidate, including a five-way race in the Sixth Judicial District.

Kritzer expects there to be more emphasis on them as U.S. Supreme Court rulings kick more issues back to the states.

“State supreme courts are now more or less the last word on abortion and on legislative redistricting,” he said. “I expect there to be more of a focus on them, particularly if those kinds of issues are coming before the court.”

What questions do you have?