ILNews

Chinn: Law and Politics

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

iba-chinn-scottAs it always is in the winter and early spring, the workings of the Indiana General Assembly is big news. So it has been this year. As this column is being issued, the time clock has run on the 2012 legislative session, which under the Indiana Constitution must end by March 14 in non-budget years (“short sessions”). The IndyBar has taken an increasingly active role in legislation over the past few years, as the Board of Directors has deemed that involvement of critical importance to the profession.

Once again this year, we established a legislative committee. IndyBar Vice President and Marion Superior Judge Heather Welch served as its chair and has done an outstanding job of keeping tabs on this year’s legislation. Every legislative session is different, but all require vigilance as there are so many bills and amendments that wind their way through the process. The committee’s priority is usually, and was this year, to play “defense” – that is, to ensure that no bills that might impair some interest of the bar or profession pass without our input. This session seemed to have fewer bills than we typically monitor as having a potential impact about which we would be concerned. We initially reviewed a lot of bills and monitored legislation involving family law, court fees for pro bono services, and litigation-related matters. As of this writing, there are no bills that we have identified as causing particular concerns.

Judge Welch was assisted ably by a seasoned team that included Vice Chair Mindy Westrick, Emily Heimann, John Render, and Jamie Cairns. As has been tradition, President Elect Kerry Hyatt Blomquist, First Vice President Jeff Abrams and I served on the committee by virtue of our officer positions. I’d like to thank the committee for its good work.

The committee also planned and executed the Sixth Annual Lawyer-Legislator Luncheon held on March 5 at the Conrad. We had a great turnout from the bar and from legislators – 23 lawmakers were in attendance and we had an overflow crowd. (Judge Welch knows how to throw a party!) The main goal of these annual luncheons is to ask legislators who are lawyers to interact with IndyBar members to discuss issues of important to the profession. But we’ve also been successful in attracting other legislators to come to the luncheon as well, which is a great boon to our efforts to have the IndyBar be a potential resource for any member of the General Assembly.

On March 5, Speaker of the House Brian Bosma and Senate President Pro Tempore David Long gave overviews of the session and then each legislator spoke in turn about his or her district, background and legislation. By the end of the luncheon, we had really covered the waterfront of legislative session highlights as well as bills and trends that lawyers might be interested in. (The lawyer-legislators agreed that we need more lawyers in the General Assembly – there are currently 27, while the non-lawyers weren’t so sure about that.) And we presented mementoes to honor retiring legislators Representative Ralph Foley and Senator Richard Bray, the chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, respectively. These long-serving legislators have had critical roles in framing laws that affect the courts, criminal law, and the profession for decades and they will be missed.

We intend to continue being active at the General Assembly in future years for three main reasons. First, it has become an essential service to protect the interests of the bar and profession. Second, in the event the IndyBar wants to advance legislative ideas of its own in the future, we must have standing and relationships with legislators to be able to communicate our interests effectively. Finally, lawyers are a civic-minded lot, and it seems right to have some involvement in the passage of laws that we are on the front lines of interpreting.

Enjoy spring break.

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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT