ILNews

Brown County team wins inaugural civic education invitational

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indiana junior high school team has brought home the crown from a newly created civic education competition held in Washington, D.C., May 3 through 7.

Brown County Junior High School topped four other middle schools and two high schools from around the country in the inaugural We the People National Invitational for middle schools.

Robert Leming, director of the We the People Programs at the Center for Civic Education, praised the Indiana team. “Brown County did very well. They were very impressive,” he said.

Like the We the People competition for high school teams, the national invitational tests the students’ knowledge and understanding of the U.S. government as well as the Constitution and its application to current issues.

The event is in response to middle schools who wanted to compete in a national competition. The two high school programs participating this year asked to attend, but only competed against each other.

“We are thrilled to see the middle school students at Brown County Junior High School succeed on a national stage,” Charles Dunlap, executive director of the Indiana Bar Foundation, said in a press release. “We think Indiana’s students are great civic scholars. This just affirms it.”

The IBF organizes Indiana’s We the People civic education program.  

Brown County Junior High School’s team won Indiana’s state final in December 2012.

In April, Cathedral High School in Indianapolis and Plainfield High School in Hendricks County earned spots in the championship round of the We the People national competition. Cathedral finished 5th best in the country and Plainfield ranked 10th best.

On May 17, Gov. Mike Pence will address more than 350 fith-grade students studying the U.S. Constitution, who will participate in a showcase of their knowledge before panels of attorneys and community leaders. The elementary showcase will occur at the Indiana Government Center in Indianapolis; the governor will address the students at 2 p.m. in the north atrium of the Statehouse.

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. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT