ILNews

Confirmation hearing set for professor

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a confirmation hearing for 2 p.m. Feb. 25 for Indiana University Maurer School of Law - Bloomington professor Dawn Johnsen. President Barack Obama nominated her for the position of assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel.

The hearing will take place in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., and will be available as a Web cast. If the committee votes in favor of her nomination, the full Senate will vote on her confirmation.

Johnsen served on Obama's transition team and in the Clinton administration as acting assistant attorney general from 1997 to 1998, and as deputy assistant attorney general from 1993 to 1996 in the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel.

She has been with the law school since 1998. She teaches constitutional law, including a course on Congress, the president, and the courts; and sexuality, reproduction, and the Constitution. She has received national attention for papers she has written that are against policies of the Bush administration. Some of her research papers - and recommendation letters - are available on the Judiciary Committee's Web site.

Also scheduled for a confirmation hearing at the same time is David S. Kris, who has been nominated to be assistant attorney general, National Security Division.

Indiana Lawyer will offer future coverage of Johnsen's nomination process.

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. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  2. If the end result is to simply record the spoke word, then perhaps some day digital recording may eventually be the status quo. However, it is a shallow view to believe the professional court reporter's function is to simply report the spoken word and nothing else. There are many aspects to being a professional court reporter, and many aspects involved in producing a professional and accurate transcript. A properly trained professional steno court reporter has achieved a skill set in a field where the average dropout rate in court reporting schools across the nation is 80% due to the difficulty of mastering the necessary skills. To name just a few "extras" that a court reporter with proper training brings into a courtroom or a deposition suite; an understanding of legal procedure, technology specific to the legal profession, and an understanding of what is being said by the attorneys and litigants (which makes a huge difference in the quality of the transcript). As to contracting, or anti-contracting the argument is simple. The court reporter as governed by our ethical standards is to be the independent, unbiased individual in a deposition or courtroom setting. When one has entered into a contract with any party, insurance carrier, etc., then that reporter is no longer unbiased. I have been a court reporter for over 30 years and I echo Mr. Richardson's remarks that I too am here to serve.

  3. A competitive bid process is ethical and appropriate especially when dealing with government agencies and large corporations, but an ethical line is crossed when court reporters in Pittsburgh start charging exorbitant fees on opposing counsel. This fee shifting isn't just financially biased, it undermines the entire justice system, giving advantages to those that can afford litigation the most. It makes no sense.

  4. "a ttention to detail is an asset for all lawyers." Well played, Indiana Lawyer. Well played.

  5. I have a appeals hearing for the renewal of my LPN licenses and I need an attorney, the ones I have spoke to so far want the money up front and I cant afford that. I was wondering if you could help me find one that takes payments or even a pro bono one. I live in Indiana just north of Indianapolis.

ADVERTISEMENT