ILNews

ACLU director discusses goals

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


Heading the organization charged with defending the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights is no easy feat.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which includes a staff of two attorneys, a paralegal, an office manager, and an executive director to oversee the big picture, receives about 800 requests a month for help in litigation. And then there's the misconception the organization supports only liberal causes, even though it has defended free speech rights for all Americans, regardless of their political position, and also publicly supported Second Amendment rights for gun owners.

After serving almost a year as the organization's interim executive director and following the search process set by the national organization, Gilbert Holmes took the post of executive director Dec. 10.

In some ways, he said, he's been preparing for the role for a long time. He has been on the board of the ACLU of Indiana for a number of years. He received his law degree from the Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis in 1999 after commuting from Fort Wayne three times a week to finish his last year.

He also served for 20 years in the U.S. Army and retired at the level of lieutenant colonel. He is a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War.

He's been the decision maker as well as the face of other high profile agencies, including IndyGo, the Indianapolis public transportation system; the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles; Lincoln National Life Insurance Co.; the Indianapolis Museum of Art; and Clarian Health.

After he left IndyGo, he started a consulting firm and worked with various organizations, including the ACLU of Indiana. So when his predecessor Claudia Porretti left in late 2008 after having served the organization since summer 2006, Holmes started as the interim executive director on a contract basis.

The organization was then required by the national organization and its bylaws to have an open application process. Holmes was ultimately approved to stay on full time in December.

Among the challenges Holmes said he has faced in his first year had to do with what most non-profit organizations are going through: keeping up with the economy.

While he said the Indiana affiliate is "doing better than we had been doing," the national organization took a hit because of the collapse of Wall Street, a major donor fell onto hard economic times, and Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme also affected the organization at the national level.

"We have our challenges cut out for us," he said. "But I think people who believe in civil liberties will still support us as much as they can."

To stay relevant and to encourage more people to support the organization, two successful events took place in 2009: a dinner and a movie.

The annual dinner featured Juan Williams, a news analyst for National Public Radio and Fox News. Williams is also the author of a number of books about the civil rights movement. That event made money in 2009, which wasn't always the case in previous years.

The organization also hosted a free screening of "American Violet" in September 2009 at the Madame Walker Theatre in Indianapolis. The film is based on a true story about racial profiling in Texas where a 24-year-old single mother of four children was wrongfully accused of dealing drugs. The ACLU defended her and she won her case. The event was also supported by Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the Urban League.

Another way to increase awareness and support the organization is the revitalization of the Lawyers Council. Holmes called it a "wonderful way for various Indianapolis law firms who want to be active to get involved."

Members of the Lawyers Council can support the ACLU by taking pro bono cases or by volunteering in other ways.

Another challenge Holmes said he faced was how to recruit and retain young supporters. Holmes mentioned the 2008 presidential election as an example of how people in their 20s and 30s were engaged in something that was important to them and to the country as a whole, and he thought the ACLU could tap into that energy.

The 2008 presidential election also proved that a big check isn't the only way to help, he said. He added even small amounts of money - or time - can make a big difference.

But the organization also needs to get the message out to members and potential supporters.

"You've got to engage people and ask them to be involved," he said. "Our affiliate does some things really well, especially litigation, but there are some things we're missing." Increased efforts for education, outreach, and advocacy are among his goals as executive director. Fran Quigley, a former executive director of the ACLU of Indiana and a current board member, agreed. "I think he's completely right that we have been an affiliate which has no peer throughout the country in how effective and comprehensive we have been as far as the issues we've represented in terms of litigation," Quigley said. "We have an amazing litigation team led by Ken Falk. But we can and should do better on public education and on non-litigation advocacy. Gil has made it clear to the board and staff that is what he plans to do."

To do this, Holmes said there are a few new young members who've recently joined the ACLU of Indiana's board of directors, including a high school student. The organization also does outreach via social networking sites such as Facebook, and he plans to do more events to raise awareness of the organization and educate the public about what the ACLU does.

For instance, he said, the group could better position itself to let schools know they are available to help teach about the Bill of Rights.

"An educated and informed public is less likely to be exploited," he said.

Another challenge is to explain what the ACLU is about, that it's non-partisan, that it's not conservative or liberal, he said.

"We even have some conservative donors who support us and give anonymously," he said regarding the stigma that it is a liberal organization.

"This is a dream get for the ACLU of Indiana," Quigley said regarding Holmes' new position.

"He is a lifelong devoted civil libertarian, and he is respected and admired throughout the state," Quigley said. "He has superior management and communication skills and is just the ideal representative for this organization at a really important time in its history."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  2. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

  3. She must be a great lawyer

  4. Ind. Courts - "Illinois ranks 49th for how court system serves disadvantaged" What about Indiana? A story today from Dave Collins of the AP, here published in the Benton Illinois Evening News, begins: Illinois' court system had the third-worst score in the nation among state judiciaries in serving poor, disabled and other disadvantaged members of the public, according to new rankings. Illinois' "Justice Index" score of 34.5 out of 100, determined by the nonprofit National Center for Access to Justice, is based on how states serve people with disabilities and limited English proficiency, how much free legal help is available and how states help increasing numbers of people representing themselves in court, among other issues. Connecticut led all states with a score of 73.4 and was followed by Hawaii, Minnesota, New York and Delaware, respectively. Local courts in Washington, D.C., had the highest overall score at 80.9. At the bottom was Oklahoma at 23.7, followed by Kentucky, Illinois, South Dakota and Indiana. ILB: That puts Indiana at 46th worse. More from the story: Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, Colorado, Tennessee and Maine had perfect 100 scores in serving people with disabilities, while Indiana, Georgia, Wyoming, Missouri and Idaho had the lowest scores. Those rankings were based on issues such as whether interpretation services are offered free to the deaf and hearing-impaired and whether there are laws or rules allowing service animals in courthouses. The index also reviewed how many civil legal aid lawyers were available to provide free legal help. Washington, D.C., had nearly nine civil legal aid lawyers per 10,000 people in poverty, the highest rate in the country. Texas had the lowest rate, 0.43 legal aid lawyers per 10,000 people in poverty. http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2014/11/ind_courts_illi_1.html

  5. A very thorough opinion by the federal court. The Rooker-Feldman analysis, in particular, helps clear up muddy water as to the entanglement issue. Looks like the Seventh Circuit is willing to let its district courts cruise much closer to the Indiana Supreme Court's shorelines than most thought likely, at least when the ADA on the docket. Some could argue that this case and Praekel, taken together, paint a rather unflattering picture of how the lower courts are being advised as to their duties under the ADA. A read of the DOJ amicus in Praekel seems to demonstrate a less-than-congenial view toward the higher echelons in the bureaucracy.

ADVERTISEMENT