ILNews

Federal courthouse on list for closure consideration

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

News that the federal courthouse in Terre Haute is being considered for closure brings a sense of déjà vu to the legal community.

A federal judicial committee has placed the Terre Haute Division of the Southern District of Indiana on its list of potential courthouse closures.

il-terrehautecourthouse-15col.jpg The federal courthouse in Terre Haute, built in 2009, is one of 60 facilities around the country being considered for closure by a U.S. Judicial Conference committee. (Submitted photo)

Closure of the courthouse has come up several times in recent years, including in the early 2000s when the 7th Circuit Judicial Conference considered whether the courthouse should close instead of trying to relocate after the United States Post Office – which shared space with the court and wanted to expand – decided not to renew the court’s lease.

The space and facilities committee of the U.S. Judicial Conference also considered closing the courthouse in 2006, placing it on the same list the court finds itself on again this year. The decision to build a new courthouse spared its closure six years ago.

Judicial officials are considering the closure of 60 courthouses in 29 states to cut costs. There are 674 courthouses and facilities across the country. The decision on what courts could close is far from finalized. Many connected to the Terre Haute location believe the busy docket and proximity to a federal penitentiary will save the court from the chopping block, but the possibility is generating a new wave of discussion about the court’s importance.

richard young Young

“I don’t want to cause concern among the bar, because I do think it’s highly unlikely that it would close,” said Chief Judge Richard Young of the Southern District of Indiana. “It’s important to make sure this is not blown out of proportion. Budget pressures facing the entire judiciary and government have caused an examination of all expenses and agencies, but this is just an initial part of the review. Just because it’s on the list doesn’t mean it’s going to be closed.”

Those facilities made the list because they do not have a full-time resident judge and instead rely on part-time magistrates or judges who travel from other larger divisions. The practice of reviewing courts without a resident judge goes back to 1997, according to spokesman David Sellers with the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts.

Critics say closing the courthouses could make it more difficult for people to get to court proceedings, particularly in the smaller, rural areas where many of the targeted courts are located. Annual operating costs and rent for the 60 listed facilities total more than $16 million, and Sellers said those expenses need decreased. But he said it’s too early to speculate how much money could be saved or how many jobs could be lost by the possible closures.

Court facilities on the list were ranked based on several categories such as cost, usage and location. A facility in Beaufort, S.C., tops the list, followed by the federal court site in Parkersburg, W.Va., and one in Harrison, Ark.

Meanwhile, the Terre Haute facility – which opened in 2009 at 921 Ohio St. after relocating from another site – is number 19 on the list.

The space and facilities committee sent this list to the 13 Circuit judicial councils for review in February, according to Sellers. The councils gave feedback to the committee in mid-April, allowing committee members to revise the list and forward its report to the U.S. Judicial Conference. Whether any courts close is up to the conference and would likely be decided at its September meeting. The U.S. Judicial Conference will look at factors such as caseloads and proximity to federal prisons.

Now, with Terre Haute again on the list, the 7th Circuit Judicial Conference has opposed the closure for reasons that include the new building.

Southern District Clerk Laura Briggs said the closure criteria gives the Terre Haute courthouse a fairly high “effectiveness” score of 383, considerably different than other courts that have scores in the double digits or even negative numbers.

The Terre Haute division is 78 miles from the Indianapolis courthouse, the next closest courthouse in the Southern District. The Terre Haute building is home to two clerk’s office staff and one probation officer. Southern District figures from fiscal year 2011 show more than 2,750 civil, criminal and bankruptcy cases were filed in that division, with nearly 120 trial hours between the District and bankruptcy judges, 43.4 in-court hours for the part-time magistrate and 157 prisoner productions by the U.S. Marshals Service. Each year on average, magistrates use the courthouse 40 days, with half of that by the part-time magistrate; the bankruptcy judges spend 50 days there.

The proximity to the high-security federal prison in Terre Haute also makes the location unique because it’s where federal death row inmates are housed, Briggs said.

“The court believes that the continued operation of the Terre Haute courthouse is imperative to the fair and effective administration of justice for the citizens and attorneys in western Indiana,” she said.

kyrouac Kyrouac

Terre Haute attorney Scott Kyrouac, immediate past-president of the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana, said the court closure would have the biggest impact on the litigants. The local economy is poor and has a disproportionate number of debtors who need bankruptcy services in particular, he pointed out. They would be forced to go to Indianapolis.

State courts would also be impacted, as many of the federal cases in Terre Haute are diversity jurisdiction matters transferred from a state court from either Indiana or Illinois. An Indiana resident injured in a serious accident in Illinois has the option of filing a cause of action in the local federal court in Terre Haute. But without that close proximity, those actions may be limited for people who can’t or won’t travel to Indianapolis.

“To require them to travel almost two hours to a different federal court would place an unfair burden on such individuals,” Kyrouac said.

This second consideration for closure by the U.S. Judicial Conference has brought up questions about whether it might be time for a full-time resident judge at that courthouse just to keep it off the list in the future.

The consensus: there’s no need.

Statistics, economic realities, political practicalities, and the caliber of traveling judges make that unnecessary, the lawyers and judges say.

“The simple answer is that there isn’t enough here to justify a full-timer, but there is certainly enough to do that visiting judges can meet the needs,” said attorney and part-time Magistrate Judge Craig McKee.

He – like other area attorneys – believes it’s likely that the division won’t close. Still, McKee thinks it’s important for the legal community to discuss options about the impact and significance of that location.

McKee said the long-term lease for the courthouse and caseloads weigh in Terre Haute’s favor in keeping the court open, particularly because bankruptcy matters and individual felony defendants arising from large drug-conspiracy cases and the federal prison nearby make up the docket.

“Long before I was appointed to this position, I was working with colleagues in the local bar to preserve a federal court division in Terre Haute,” he said. “It’s not nearly as dire as the list would indicate, but this is highly important to the community and to the bar.”•

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. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT