Greg Wersal is best known for his work in judicial elections and accountability. In 1996, Greg Wersal announced that he was a candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court for the election that would take place in 1998. Throughout 1996 and 1997, Greg attended and spoke at numerous political party conventions of the Republican Party, the Independence Party and the Constitution Party. At some point in time, his activities came to the attention to the Minnesota Supreme Court and on January 1, 1998, the Minnesota Supreme Court created new rules for the Code of Judicial Conduct. The new rules prohibited judicial candidates from attending and speaking at political party gatherings.

The Code is a set of ethical rules that say how judges are to conduct themselves and part of the Code deals with what judicial candidates can do when running for office. Violating the code is "unethical" conduct and could result in a lawyer being sanctioned, even loosing his license to practice law.

The Code of Judicial Conduct also prohibited many other activities that one would assume are normal election activities. For example, the Code prohibited judicial candidates from stating their views on legal or political issues. What a candidate for judicial office was supposed to tell the public as a compelling reason to vote for him is unclear. The Code prohibited judicial candidates from personally soliciting campaign funds. How a candidate was suppose to raise money to get a message out to the voters is again unclear. Judicial elections did not work -- the public generally did not know who the candidates were or why they should vote for them.

In March of 1998, Greg Wersal was joined by the Republican Party of Minnesota in a federal lawsuit to challenge many of the campaign restrictions in the Code. The case called the Republican Party of Minnesota v. White made it way up to the U.S. Supreme Court . The U.S. Supreme Court decided that judicial candidates have a free speech right under the First Amendment to state their views and legal and political issues. (White I , decided 2002) The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down as unconstitutional infringements of free speech the other provisions of the Code that had been challenged. (White II decided 2005). As a result of the Court of Appeals decision,judicial candidates can:

1. Attend political party gatherings
2. Seek political party endorsement
3. Identify themselves as current or past members of a political party
4. Personally solicit campaign funds

The White cases have had nationwide impact. Approximately 80% of all judges in the United States are elected. As a result of the White cases, more incumbent judges are being challenged, more information is available to the voters, and the system of elections is more vibrant.

In Minnesota, many incumbent judges continue to run unopposed. However, since the White cases were decided, political parties have endorsed judicial candidates and, in a recent election, an incumbent judge was defeated by a challenger.