ILNews

Former Indiana chief justice to receive democracy award

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Randall T. Shepard, former Indiana chief justice, will receive the Advancing American Democracy Award from the Benjamin Harrison Presidential Site next month.

The award recognizes an individual who, in an exemplary way, advances the values of American democracy by encouraging and enabling ethical citizen participation in government.  7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge John Tinder will present the award to Shepard at the 9th annual Mary Tucker Jasper Speaker Series Sept. 11 at the Columbia Club in Indianapolis.
 
“We are privileged to bestow this annual award on Chief Justice Shepard for his amazing accomplishments, contributions and judicial excellence,” said Phyllis Geeslin, president & CEO of the Benjamin Harrison Presidential Site. “The chief justice has truly helped advance the cause of democracy as a servant-leader for Indiana’s judiciary. We honor him for his creative vision, his dedication, and his legacy of distinction in which he served 25 years of leadership in our state’s legal system.”

Shepard joined the Indiana Supreme Court in 1985, and served as chief justice for 25 years before stepping down in March 2012. He serves as a senior judge on the Indiana Court of Appeals, teaches at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, and is chairman of the American Bar Association’s presidential commission examining the state of legal education in America. He is also Indiana University Public Policy Institute’s executive in residence.

The keynote speaker of the event is former White House Counsel and 9/11 Commissioner Fred F. Fielding. The dinner, program and presentation of the award begin at 6:30 p.m. For more information, call Stacy Clark or Erin Trisler at 317-631-1888.


 

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. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT