ACLU of Indiana to host discussion of government surveillance

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A panel of experts next week will take a closer look at the devices that are taking a closer look at us.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana will hold a panel discussion examining privacy and technology. Free and open to the public, the hour-long event will examine the potential for new surveillance of American life from things like drones, federal government and GPS location tracking.

Panelists include Jane Henegar, ACLU of Indiana executive director; Rep. Sue Errington, D-Muncie; and Rich Hanson of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. Phil Bremen, associate professor at Ball State University, will moderate the discussion.

The discussion, “Where Do We Draw the Line on Government Surveillance,” will be held from noon to 12:50 p.m. June 4 in Digital A&B Room of the Innovation Connector, 1208 W. White River Blvd, Muncie.

For more information, visit


  • false opposition
    While I think they sometimes do good, for the most part I think the ACLU is a sop for big government. Now consider all these violations of privacy, warrantless searches done by the NSA: each and every one a violation of criminal law-- thoroughly documented-- and not a single one charged as a crime. A level of intrusion that makes King George look like a silly joke by comparison. Add to that a president that says he not only can assassinate foreigners with killer robot airplanes, but that he can kill American citizens abroad too . And has admittedly done so. (Anwar Al Aliki) With no due process at all.... Let's be frank. The federal executive branch has become LAWLESS. Add to that the anti-democratic judiciary, that lets the executive do whatever it wants, even as it strikes down legit democratic laws because powerful lobbies don't like them-- and a gutless, feckless Congress, afraid of their own shadow -- and you have a system that has become a mockery of itself. "illegitimate" is a word that comes to mind. But the ACLU-- they're good at "not overstating their case." And after all, their number one issue appears to be suppressing Christianity so why bother going hard and fast at Big Brother? Or was it gay rights? Seems like it comes down to what Lenin said "the best way to control the opposition is by leading it ourselves."
  • Julie Is Right
    After reading Julie Kuespert's comment I was amazed at the similarities. They do this to people ALL THE TIME, with little or no oversight. It's essentially gang stalking, orchestrated by police.
  • Coworkers allowed to invade privacy
    recently forced to take fmla leave,was harrassed for months,nothing done.made comment management was part of it if they refuse to do anything about it,they allowed coworkers access to work,home computers and cell and shared info with anyone and everyone thats what happens when you have access to others info and allow the wrong people access or allow them to monotor others.

    Post a comment to this story

    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
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

    2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

    3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

    4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

    5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.