ILNews

Civil rights groups form partnership

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Jeff Lorick, executive director of the Terre Haute Human Relations Commission, often receives complaints about unfair housing practices. But until recently, Lorick has had little power to make local landlords comply with fair housing laws.

“We can mediate, but we can’t litigate,” Lorick said. And landlords aren’t always willing to participate in the mediation process.

But now Lorick has some help. The State of Indiana Civil Rights Commission announced on March 21 that it has formed a partnership with the Terre Haute HRC in an effort to bring more services to people in Lorick’s jurisdiction.

Jamal Smith, executive director of the ICRC, said that everyone in the state should have access to the kind of help ICRC provides.

“We feel the best way to do that is to collaborate with folks locally,” Smith said.

The Terre Haute HRC doesn’t receive federal funds and has a limited budget for outreach efforts. But with ICRC’s support, Lorick’s agency will be able to educate more people about discrimination.

“We have a larger staff – attorneys on staff who are versed in the areas of workplace and housing discrimination.” Smith said. “We can provide trainings there locally. We have attorneys on staff that facilitate and coordinate continuing legal education seminars.”

Part of that educational effort will involve reaching out to Terre Haute landlords so that they’re aware of fair housing practices – and the consequences of disregarding them.

Danny Lopez, education director for ICRC, says it has always been ICRC’s responsibility to serve the entire state. But that’s difficult to do without the input of local agencies.

“Way too often … there’s not a lot of communication and collaboration between agencies,” Lopez said. “We’ve been trying to make sure that we address those gaps in a way that makes the most sense.”

Smith said that the ICRC will be canvassing the state in April, which is Fair Housing Month, to get the word out about the benefits of partnering with the state agency.

“Jeff is one of the first of what we hope will be the first of many such partnerships in the state,” Smith said.
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT