Opinion ID: 1613415
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: constitutional authority for term extension orders.

Text: The Minnesota Constitution mandates the election of judges and specifies that the term of office of all judges shall be six years. Minn. Const. art. VI, § 7. Election is the principal method of selecting judges: Since the adoption of the Minnesota constitution in 1857, there has been a constitutional requirement that judges be elected by the people, except in those situations in which the constitution itself permits appointment by the governor. State ex rel. LaJesse v. Meisinger, 258 Minn. 297, 299, 103 N.W.2d 864, 866 (1960). Constitutional provisions for filling a judicial office by gubernatorial appointment should be construed as subordinate to the sections providing for, and to be applicable only where vacancies in the judicial office cannot be filled by, the election of judges in regular course. Enger v. Holm, 213 Minn. 154, 157, 6 N.W.2d 101, 102 (1942). Prior to 1956, the Minnesota Constitution did not provide for the retirement of judges. Under statutes in effect prior to 1956, if a judge had served a sufficient number of years to qualify for retirement benefits, but lost an election prior to reaching retirement age, the judge lost all entitlement to any retirement benefits. See Anderson v. State, 298 Minn. 158, 160, 214 N.W.2d 668, 669 (1973). The Minnesota Constitution was amended in 1956 to address these concerns: The legislature may provide by law for retirement of all judges [and] for the extension of the term of any judge who shall become eligible for retirement within three years after expiration of the term for which he is selected   . Minn. Const. art. VI § 10 (adopted Nov. 6, 1956) (emphasis added). Article VI, section 10 was subsequently amended in 1974; section 10 became section 9. The language of this section was also slightly changed from shall become eligible to becomes eligible. No significance has been attached to this change. See Saetre v. State, 398 N.W.2d 538, 540 (Minn. 1986) (article VI, section 9 remains unchanged from the 1956 version). Shortly before the 1956 restructured constitution was adopted, Dean Maynard Pirsig [5] explained the purpose of the term extension provision in article VI, section 9: The proposed judiciary article    is designed to permit legislation which will protect the judge whose term will expire before he becomes eligible for retirement and is compelled to run again for another term if he is to receive the benefits of the retirement laws. Maynard E. Pirsig, The Proposed Amendment of the Judiciary Article of the Minnesota Constitution, 40 Minn.L.Rev. 815, 840 (1956). When examining constitutional language, it is our task to give effect to the clear, explicit, unambiguous and ordinary meaning of the language. Rice v. Connolly, 488 N.W.2d 241, 247 (Minn.1992) (citing State ex rel. Gardner v. Holm, 241 Minn. 125, 129, 62 N.W.2d 52, 55 (1954)). [W]e are interested in reaching the viewpoint of the framers of our fundamental law. Their intent, gathered from both the letter and spirit of the language, is the law. Unambiguous words need no interpretation.    We are not empowered to say that these men meant something they did not say.    We are not at liberty to give the language of the constitution any meaning other than its natural and ordinary meaning unless such construction would lead to an unjust or otherwise unreasonable result manifestly not intended. The constitution is the mandate of the sovereign power, and we must accept its clear language as it reads. It is our duty to construe the law; we cannot ingraft upon the constitution things that might have been included. State ex rel. Putnam v. Holm, 172 Minn. 162, 166, 215 N.W. 200, 202 (1927) (citations omitted). The language of article VI, section 9 authorizes the legislature to provide for a term extension if a judge becomes eligible for benefits within three years. [6] We conclude this provision is intended to protect the judge who would be ineligible for a pension without an extension of his term. This construction of article VI, section 9 is consistent with the concept that judicial offices ordinarily should be filled by election; the governor's authority to extend a judge's term is available only upon the limited occasion when it becomes necessary for a judge to achieve retirement eligibility, thus avoiding the pitfalls of prior years when, shortly before retirement age, a judge could lose an election and forfeit all rights to retirement benefits.