As the 142nd President of the Minnesota State Bar Association (MSBA), Samuel Edmunds steps into his new role with a wealth of experience, a deep commitment to the legal profession, and a clear vision for the future. A partner at Sieben Edmunds Miller, Sam has built a reputation not only as a skilled attorney but also as a dedicated leader who understands the importance of showing up, getting involved, and making a difference.
In this exclusive interview, Sam shares his platform, his goals for the MSBA, and his thoughts on the challenges and opportunities facing the legal community today. From judicial election integrity to the impact of artificial intelligence on the practice of law, Sam’s priorities reflect both his passion for justice and his commitment to supporting attorneys across Minnesota.
Join us as we delve into the insights and aspirations of one of the MSBA’s youngest and most dynamic presidents, exploring how he plans to lead the association and continue making a meaningful impact on the legal profession and beyond.
What inspired you to pursue the presidency of the Minnesota State Bar Association, and how does it feel to be leading such a prominent organization?
It’s been a long journey. My first year as a lawyer, in 2007, I attended a meeting of the New Lawyers Section of the State Bar Association, and I felt like I found my place there—a group of other young lawyers trying to do good things for the profession. I quickly got involved in leadership and soon found myself at meetings with the leaders of the bar. I became inspired by the former leaders back then and the great work they were doing.
So, probably ever since then, 2007 or 2008, I thought, “Wow, bar president is something I might be able to do when I’m near the end of my career, in my 60s or 70s.” But it wasn’t something I was intentionally trying to reach quickly. I just always wanted to stay involved in the leadership of the bar and help move our mission forward.
Each year passed, and I kept doing more and more within the Bar Association. The Bar is so big, with different sections, committees, and leadership positions, and I ended up doing just about everything around the bar. By now, I’ve become one of the most experienced people around.
As for leading the organization, I’m just so humbled and excited. The Bar Association does so much good for the community, for the profession, and for society as a whole. It’s such an important organization, and it’s a great honor to be able to lead the effort.
Can you share a bit about your journey within the MSBA and how your previous roles have prepared you for this leadership position?
In the early years, I rose to lead the top leadership of the New Lawyers Section of the bar. As chair of that section, I introduced a couple of new initiatives that have been great for new lawyers and have survived and thrived until today. One of those is the annual New Lawyers Leadership Conference, which I believe is now in its 12th year. This conference trains new lawyers to be leaders—not just bar leaders, but also leaders in the community, in nonprofits, in politics, or whatever path they choose.
We also created the Outstanding New Lawyer of the Year Award. Back then, we noticed that the Bar Association gave out many prestigious awards to deserving lawyers, but they were usually very senior lawyers. We wanted to give some recognition to young lawyers who were doing great work.
This is now my 11th year on the Board of Governors. As President, I lead the Board of Governors, which essentially runs the show for the Bar Association. I started early on as the representative from the New Lawyers Section, and immediately after that, I secured a long-term position on the board. I served six years representing my geographic area, and then I became an officer. The officer track is four years—first as Secretary, then Treasurer, then President-Elect, and now President.
In the meantime, I also chaired our Elections Committee and our Practice Management Section, which is an area I’m really interested in. I’m a bit of a tech guy, so I’m very interested in technology tools for lawyers and how solo and small firm practitioners like myself can run their practices more efficiently.
As for your platform and goals as the President of the MSBA, you’ve said that judicial election integrity is a key focus for your presidency. What specific challenges do you see in maintaining fair and impartial judicial elections in Minnesota, and what steps do you plan to take to address these challenges?
Not all states elect their judges. Federally, judges are appointed and get lifetime appointments, which is a totally different system. A lot of states have appointment or retention election systems, but in Minnesota, we still have a traditional election system for judges. However, that comes with risks.
We’ve seen in some other states that politics can invade the judicial selection process. For example, in Wisconsin, big-money politics comes in from around the country. Super PACs spend millions of dollars to support political candidates for judge, and they don’t hide the fact that they’re doing it for political reasons. You’ll see a Democratic candidate for judge and a Republican candidate for judge, and people know these judges are trying to be elected on a platform that might influence their judicial decisions based on politics. It’s not supposed to be that way.
In Minnesota, we’ve been lucky to avoid most of that. Our judges are nonpartisan—they don’t get endorsed by parties. The Bar Association really strives to keep it that way. I think our role is primarily education. We want lawyers and the public to understand our system of judicial elections, why it’s important, how lucky we are, and why people should get involved and participate in the process.
Another big thing we do is the judicial plebiscite. A plebiscite is essentially a poll. The Bar Association doesn’t endorse judges in any race; we stay neutral. We don’t give money, and as president, I don’t go out and say I’m supporting a specific judge. Instead, we conduct a preference poll among our members to see how many members prefer one judge candidate over another.
This poll provides more objective data that we can then push out through the media. We recognize that most members of the public don’t know much about judicial candidates, so the opinions of the lawyers who practice before these judges is very valuable. We’re working on this right now, and we should have the results of our plebiscite by the end of the month. Then, we’ll be able to push that out to the media and get the word out.
Another key part of your platform is to address artificial intelligence. How do you envision artificial intelligence impacting the legal profession in Minnesota? What are some of the potential benefits and risks, and how is the MSBA preparing to address them?
I’d say there are probably three key points on that.
The first concern that popped into lawyers’ minds with AI is the issue of unauthorized practice of law. As technology becomes more intelligent, there’s a question of whether non-lawyers using AI might inadvertently engage in the practice of law without a license, which is actually a crime. This raises questions about whether the AI system itself could be doing something wrong or if the people using it—both non-lawyers and lawyers—are at risk of crossing legal boundaries. So, we want to clarify the rules to ensure everyone knows what’s acceptable.
The second point relates to our ethical obligations as lawyers. We’ve already seen instances where a lawyer might ask an AI like ChatGPT to draft a legal brief, only to find that the AI is not always accurate and sometimes even “hallucinates”—that’s actually the official term. You’ve probably heard about the case in New York where a lawyer submitted a serious legal brief generated by ChatGPT that was completely wrong, with made-up case citations. It was obvious to the judge and opposing counsel, and that lawyer got into trouble. So, lawyers need to understand how to use AI effectively while staying within ethical rules and ensuring we’re doing our job correctly.
The third point is the potential for AI to help address the access to justice gap. Last year, the State Bar Association appointed an Artificial Intelligence Working Group, which has now completed its first year and submitted a report. The biggest takeaway from that report is the idea that AI could be used to help improve access to justice. We have a huge problem where only a small percentage of the public can afford lawyers, and many people don’t get the legal help they need.
Our working group suggested that AI might be able to help bridge this gap so that everyone can have access to legal services. This year, the new AI Standing Committee will try to figure out the practical, on-the-ground steps we need to take to make this a reality. It’s still a big idea we’re working on, but we’re moving towards figuring out how to implement it.
You’ve mentioned the State Bar Commission on Access to Court Records as one of your priorities. What changes or improvements are you advocating for, and how do you think they will benefit attorneys and the public?
There are two main points on this issue, and it’s something that’s very important to me, especially as a private criminal defense lawyer.
First, there’s been a long-standing problem with the electronic court records systems. For a while, there have been multiple systems in place for different purposes. The issue is that government lawyers, like prosecutors and public defenders, get special login privileges to these systems and can access a wide range of records that private attorneys, like myself, cannot access. This creates a significant inequality in access to information. For example, when I’m going head-to-head with a prosecutor on a case, they might have access to much more data about my client than I do, which is simply unfair.
The second point is that these technologies are getting old. Within the last year, the state court system had to shut down two of these programs because they were outdated, overworked, and vulnerable to cyber threats. This sudden shutdown has even affected prosecutors, who are now concerned that they aren’t getting the access to court records that they need. So, we’re facing a perfect storm where both sides are experiencing problems.
To address this, I’m putting together a Blue Ribbon Commission to study these issues and come up with a solution. I’m working to include high-profile lawyers and judges on this commission to ensure it’s taken seriously. By the end of the commission’s work, we hope to have a proposal ready to present to the Supreme Court, identifying the problems and offering a way to fix them.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion have been ongoing priorities for the MSBA. What are your specific plans to advance DEI within the legal community during your term?
I think the Bar Association has done a very good job of advancing DEI for many years. What strikes me, though, is the trend we’re seeing around the country where DEI initiatives are becoming disfavored, particularly in the political realm and in government. So, the biggest point I want to make is that the State Bar of Minnesota is not changing course—we’re moving ahead full speed, committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
We have a group called the Diversity and Inclusion Leadership Council. It operates like another board, working side by side with our Board of Governors. One of the key things this group does is bring in representatives from all of the Affinity Bar Associations. We want to stay closely connected to groups like the Black Lawyers Association, the Minnesota Asian American Pacific Islander Bar Association (MNAPABA), the Hispanic Bar Association, and many others. We ensure that these groups have a seat at the table, with some of their leaders participating both on our Board of Governors and in the Diversity and Inclusion Leadership Council.
This continues to be a strong priority for our Bar Association. Additionally, we are committed to bringing diverse lawyers of all types into leadership roles. Whenever we’re making decisions about appointments to boards or committees, whether internal or external, we always keep diversity top of mind.
You talked a little about access to justice when we were discussing AI. What initiatives or programs do you plan to introduce or continue to ensure that all Minnesotans have access to legal resources and representation?
We have a very active Access to Justice Committee within our bar that brings together leaders from legal services and pro bono organizations across the state. I think the biggest things our bar can do are, first, financial support. There’s a complicated web of how legal services organizations get funded. A lot of it comes from a national pool of money known as the Legal Services Corporation. Our Bar Association goes to Washington, D.C., to lobby our members of Congress and the Senate to push for more funding for legal services. This ensures that those funds filter down to our organizations in Minnesota.
The second important piece is pro bono work. Legal services organizations hire full-time lawyers to do critical work for people in need, but we try to fill in the gaps with pro bono lawyers, like myself, my firm, and other firms. We encourage all lawyers in the Bar Association to commit to doing pro bono representation for people who can’t afford a lawyer. We’ve set an aspirational goal of at least 50 hours of pro bono work per lawyer per year. If all lawyers contributed their 50 hours, it would make a major difference.
Our focus is on increasing the percentage of lawyers doing that work, which would have a significant impact on access to justice.
Can you share your approach to advocacy and how you plan to influence legislation, policies, and court decisions that affect the legal profession and the public?
There are three main arms to our advocacy efforts.
First, we do a lot of advocacy at the state courts. In Minnesota, the Supreme Court and the judicial branch are independent from the other branches of government, and the Supreme Court sets many of the rules and policies that affect the bar and the courts. The Bar Association needs to be there to advocate for positive changes in those rules and policies. We propose changes to the rules, respond to proposed changes, and sometimes file amicus briefs. If there’s an important case at the Supreme Court, our Bar Association might get involved by filing a brief to advocate for a particular outcome.
The second arm is our work with the legislature. The Minnesota State Bar is highly respected at the legislature as a subject matter expert. We try to stay out of political debates, focusing instead on providing our legal expertise. For example, if the legislature is going to pass a law, we’ll advise on potential legal pitfalls and suggest how to change the language to make the law more effective and easier to implement. We have a full-time lobbying team, and our Board of Governors and Assembly consider policies and positions each year to decide our priorities. We then send our leaders, like myself, and our lobbying team to St. Paul to push for those priorities. Every year, we have a list of successes where the bar has proposed and successfully passed laws.
Lastly, our role at the federal level is more limited because much of our work as lawyers is state-specific. However, we maintain a close relationship with our members of Congress. In recent years, due to the pandemic, we’ve done a lot of meetings by Zoom, but this year, I’m making sure we return to sending a delegation to Washington, D.C. There’s a day in the spring called ABA Day, which is the American Bar Association’s Lobby Day in D.C., where lawyers from around the country meet with members of Congress. We usually focus on financial issues, such as pushing for funding for legal services and public defenders, but some years there might be a specific federal bill that’s important to lawyers, and we’ll advocate for that as well.
Can you speak on the issue of courthouse security bypass, why this is important to you, and what changes would you like to see implemented?
This issue is closely connected to the court records access problem. For years, courthouse security has been increasing, which is obviously important. If you’ve ever been to a courthouse, you know most of them now have metal detectors and security screening, similar to getting into an airport.
But what we’ve seen is that certain individuals who are deemed trustworthy enough get a pass card. Many prosecutors, public defenders, court staff, judges, and clerks get to wave their key card, bypass the metal detectors, and enter through a back door. Private lawyers, on the other hand, receive no special treatment. We’re treated the same as the public and have to stand in long lines, take off our shoes and belts and more, and go through the metal detectors.
We see this as a fairness issue. Private lawyers should be able to apply for the same keycard access that other lawyers get. It becomes especially stark in certain situations. For example, I had an experience where I was at the courthouse in the middle of a jury trial, and I arrived just a few minutes before the courthouse opened on a cold, snowy morning. I was standing in the vestibule with members of the jury, which is supposed to be tightly controlled because I’m not supposed to talk to jurors outside of the courtroom. It was already awkward, and then we all waited together to get through security while the prosecutor on our case casually walked through the hallway inside the warm courthouse, heading to the courtroom.
You can’t help but wonder, why does the prosecutor get this easy access, and why don’t I? It says something without saying something. To address this issue statewide, I feel that it will require legislation because each courthouse is managed by the local sheriff. We’ve been working on this for many years, but achieving a statewide solution will likely require the legislature to pass a law requiring sheriffs to provide this access.
When it comes to representing Greater Minnesota, what unique challenges do attorneys in these areas face, and how do you plan to support them during your presidency?
The biggest challenge to emphasize is what’s being referred to as “rural deserts.” For many years, small-town communities around the state have struggled with a lack of local lawyers. There are places where you might have to travel a hundred miles or more to find a lawyer. This creates significant barriers for rural populations trying to access legal help because lawyers are few and far between.
The problem is compounding as fewer lawyers aspire to practice in rural Minnesota. Most legal jobs, law firms, and attorneys are concentrated in the metro area, so that’s where most of us practice. This isn’t just an issue in Minnesota—it’s a problem in many states around the country. The question we’re all grappling with is: How can we incentivize lawyers to practice in Greater Minnesota, in our rural and outstate communities?
We frequently hear from long-standing lawyers in rural Minnesota who are nearing retirement. They want to bring in a lawyer to take over their practice, and they often have a highly successful, turnkey operation ready for someone to step into. But despite their efforts, they struggle to find lawyers willing to make the move.
This year, we’re focusing on addressing this issue. We’re working on a couple of initiatives to help. One idea is to create an online tool—a centralized location where lawyers, law firms, and organizations in Greater Minnesota can post their job opportunities and what they’re looking for. This would make it easier for lawyers interested in moving outside the metro area to find and access these opportunities.
Your colleagues describe you as someone who always shows up and is deeply committed to the profession. How do you plan to bring this energy and commitment to your role as MSBA president?
I’d say my focus has always been on bringing other people in. Over the many years of working within the Bar Association, I’ve concentrated on making friends and building relationships. It’s almost become my social group, with so many great connections formed over the years.
At the same time, I’ve also encouraged and pushed my friends and colleagues to get involved in the important work we’re doing. I’m always looking to put people in positions where they can succeed and contribute to the work they’re passionate about.
I’m committed to being welcoming—everyone is invited, and everyone gets a seat at the table. This ties directly into our diversity priorities as well. I’d say that’s the biggest way I plan to bring my energy and commitment to the role.
Beyond your term as president, where do you see the MSBA heading in the next five to ten years, and what role do you hope to play in its future?
I think the biggest challenge in the years ahead is membership. It’s not just bar associations—professional and membership organizations of all types across the country are seeing declines. Part of this is due to baby boomers retiring, but we also see that younger generations of lawyers don’t have the same attitude toward joining organizations as we used to. They’re less inclined to join, so overall, our membership is trending down every year.
As a voluntary association, we can’t survive without members. If membership declines each year, our budget and resources decline as well, limiting what we can do. We want to reverse that trend. Once I’m done being president, if I stay involved in anything, it’s probably going to be on that point—working to ensure the bar association not only survives but thrives, with a large majority of lawyers choosing to join.
I’ve also been very involved in the American Bar Association for many years, and I’d probably continue and possibly shift more of my focus to a national level. There’s another group called the National Conference of Bar Presidents, where I’ve already been involved for a few years. I’ll likely aim to take on a leadership role there. This group is crucial—it’s the national organization that trains bar association leaders around the country. With so many state and local bar associations around the country, lawyers often find themselves in leadership positions quickly and might wonder what they’re supposed to do. The National Conference of Bar Presidents helps train these leaders and shares the great things bar associations are doing across the country.
What do you hope your legacy as MSBA president will be, and how do you want to be remembered by your colleagues and the legal community?
As I’m just starting out, I hope that when people look back, they might use the word “inspirational” to describe my time as president. I want the work I try to accomplish this year to have a lasting impact, not just for this year, but in the long term. Even for some of the priorities I may not finish, I hope my colleagues will be inspired to continue that work.
I also want to inspire others to get involved, to join the bar, and to take on leadership roles within the bar. It’s important to me to bring in people who don’t look like me or have the same life experiences I’ve had, and to ensure they have the same opportunities I’ve enjoyed. I’m very aware that being a white guy from middle-class suburban Minneapolis gives me privileges that others may not have, so I’m committed to doing everything I can to give others great opportunities to succeed and thrive.
To stay updated on Sam Edmunds’ initiatives and ongoing work as MSBA president, visit our dedicated webpage here.
