Today, 33 States and the District of Columbia use nominating commissions to help select judges in some or all of their courts. The main difficulty for the commissions is that even though the literature is filled with testimonials extolling various judicial virtues, no one has ever defined precisely what qualities judicial applicants must have and how those qualities should be measured in aspiring lawyers. This report assumes that a relatively small number of broadly representative, well-defined criteria is more useful than long lists of undefined repetitive words. Detailed commentary define the criteria and associated roles. There is no weighting in determining the criteria. The nine selected criteria are suitable age, communication skills, good health, industry, integrity, judicial temperament, justice, professional skills, and social consciousness. These criteria, which grow from the nature of the judicial role, establish a very high standard for those seeking judicial office. It lends itself to assuring a broad mix, representing the social composition and values of the community. In addition to the nominating commission's mandate for recommending the most qualified persons for judicial office, the commission serves an important role when it insures that a variety of views and background have the opportunity for representation on the bench. Three tables and 321 footnotes are provided.