ILNews

We the People team 8th in nation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Rehearing

High school students who represented Indiana at the 23rd annual We the People congressional hearing competition placed eighth among the teams competing on the national level in Washington, D.C., April 22-27.

Team Indiana’s 28 seniors from Munster High School were among more than 1,100 high school students from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Because the students advanced to the top 10, the team competed in a congressional hearing room at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.

The team was supported by the Indiana Bar Foundation and financial contributions from members of the legal community.

Since the program moved to the Indiana State Bar Association and IBF six years ago, teams representing Indiana have placed in the top 10 at the national level five out of the past six years, according to Erin Braun, director of civic education for the IBF and We the People state coordinator.

“I could not be prouder of Team Indiana. To make the top 10 in the nation and finish eighth is not an easy accomplishment. These students represented our state with poise and professionalism, and they get the importance of civic education,” Braun said via e-mail.

“At the banquet, Mary Beth Tinker spoke and our students excitedly told us they had her autograph their pocket Constitutions,” she added.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of Tinker in 1969 on a First Amendment case.

The IBF is also promoting the website http://anhourforcivics.org/. The organization is seeking donations to cover civics education programs. They ask attorneys to give the equivalent amount of one billable hour.•


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. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT