Editorial: New justice brings much to appreciate

Editorial Indiana Lawyer
September 29, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Editorial

Congratulations to Indiana’s 106th justice, the Honorable Steven David of the Boone Circuit Court.

Judge David brings to the bench a broad diversity of experience that will be a tremendous asset to the Indiana Supreme Court, and thereby to us all. The son of a career Air Force man, Judge David recently retired from his own military career, having served in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps. During his military service, he helped reform the treatment of detainees in Iraq and served as chief defense counsel for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

But there’s more to appreciate about soon-to-be Justice David: He has served as special judge by Supreme Court appointment, and hearing officer or special master in attorney and judicial misconduct cases. And as juvenile judge in Boone County, Judge David also has been a vocal advocate for families and on juvenile law. He’s justifiably proud that he’s never been overturned on appeal in a parental-rights termination case.

But to end our discussion of his appointment to the high court here would overlook the elephant in the room: Half of the state of Indiana is still waiting for another justice who looks like them.

Women make up half of the bar, half of the state, half of the nation, half of the world, and yet Indiana remains one of two states in the union without a woman on its court of last resort.

We will repeat here the words we used in our July 7-20 editorial – words from our archives from Supreme Court Justice Randall T. Shepard: “I have no doubt what the future looks like. The only question is, when will that future roll around?” The chief justice pondered that in a news story that ran in our newspaper shortly after Justice Robert Rucker was named to the high court in 1999.

All the women of the state of Indiana, not just the women lawyers and judges, would like to know the answer to that question.

We were intrigued by the observation of Kathy L. Osborn, a partner at Baker & Daniels in Indianapolis, who believes one factor working against women being appointed to the high court is the fact there has never been a woman lawyer on the Indiana Judicial Qualifications Commission and Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission.

The bar in Indiana’s district 2 will vote next month on a vacancy that opens at year’s end, when LewisWagner partner John Trimble’s term ends Dec. 31. Five central Indiana lawyers are in the running.

Osborn and Barnes & Thornburg partner Jan Carroll are two of the five candidates.

Women have served on the commission since it was created in 1970, but all were non-attorneys appointed by the governor. The current female member, Evansville resident Christine Keck, is director of strategy and business development for renewable energy at Energy Systems Group in Newburgh. Her term also expires in December.

“The disappointing fact that Indiana only ever has had one female Supreme Court justice, and currently has none, is an historical one that goes to the cumulative decisions that have been made over nearly two centuries,” Osborn told our reporter for a news story on Page 3 about the commission election.

She isn’t critical of Judge David’s recent appointment to the high court, but she’s eager to lay the groundwork for the appointment of women to our high court.

“I am interested in serving on the Judicial Nominating Commission in part because I believe the fact that there has never been a female attorney on that commission could be one factor of many that has impacted historical nominating and appointment decisions.”

Perhaps Osborne is onto something.

Regardless, the women of Indiana are still waiting for the future to roll around.•


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues