Will the governor appoint a female justice?

August 9, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

When the application process began for those interesting in being the next Indiana justice, women dominated the applicant pool. Now, Gov. Mitch Daniels has just a 33 percent chance of appointing a woman to the Indiana Supreme Court.

For those who want to see a female justice, the best case scenario would have been for the nominating commission to send three women’s names to the governor. I expected to see two women listed as finalists, so I was surprised to see only one woman make the final cut. Hamilton Superior Judge Steven Nation, Tippecanoe Superior Judge Loretta Rush, or Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP attorney Geoffrey Slaughter will be an Indiana justice before year’s end.

I was unable to sit in on the interviews this time, so my reaction is based only on what my co-worker relayed to me about the interviews, what I’ve read, and my limited knowledge of all the candidates going into the interviews. It appears that Rush was the only woman who the Judicial Nominating Commission felt ranked among the top three in their qualifications to be a justice. A glance at the original applicant names and the semifinalist list showed several other women who appeared on paper to be possible contenders.

This blog is not to dismiss or discredit the qualifications of the men who applied and have made it to the list of finalists. It is to address the pink elephant in the room.

Twenty-two people applied to replace Frank Sullivan Jr. on the court; 16 of the original applicants were women. Even when the 10 semifinalists were named, there were more women than men who made the cut. But none of that matters now; what matters are the three names the governor will select from.

Daniels is facing heat from some to appoint a woman. Many thought when Theodore Boehm stepped down in 2009, that appointment would be a woman. Then again with Randall Shepard earlier this year, the thoughts were he has to appoint a woman this time. We’re one of just three states that does not have a female on our Supreme Court right now.

I agree with the responses of several of the applicants during their interviews Wednesday that diversity on the court doesn’t just mean gender or ethnicity. We want people to have diverse work experiences and life experiences. I’d argue you’d get that from appointing a woman.

This appointment is likely Daniels’ last chance to appoint a woman to the “dream team” of justices he referenced during Chief Justice Brent Dickson’s official oath ceremony this week. Our former “dream team” consisted of five well-qualified, respected and collegial men: Boehm, Dickson, Robert Rucker, Shepard and Sullivan. Might the governor add a well-qualified, respected, collegial woman so the new “dream team” is Dickson, Rucker, David, Massa and Rush? There’s a 33 percent chance it will happen.
 

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
  1. I can understand a 10 yr suspension for drinking and driving and not following the rules,but don't you think the people who compleate their sentences and are trying to be good people of their community,and are on the right path should be able to obtain a drivers license to do as they please.We as a state should encourage good behavior instead of saying well you did all your time but we can't give you a license come on.When is a persons time served than cause from where I'm standing,its still a punishment,when u can't have the freedom to go where ever you want to in car,truck ,motorcycle,maybe their should be better programs for people instead of just throwing them away like daily trash,then expecting them to change because they we in jail or prison for x amount of yrs.Everyone should look around because we all pay each others bills,and keep each other in business..better knowledge equals better community equals better people...just my 2 cents

  2. I was wondering about the 6 million put aside for common attorney fees?does that mean that if you are a plaintiff your attorney fees will be partially covered?

  3. I expressed my thought in the title, long as it was. I am shocked that there is ever immunity from accountability for ANY Government agency. That appears to violate every principle in the US Constitution, which exists to limit Government power and to ensure Government accountability. I don't know how many cases of legitimate child abuse exist, but in the few cases in which I knew the people involved, in every example an anonymous caller used DCS as their personal weapon to strike at innocent people over trivial disagreements that had no connection with any facts. Given that the system is vulnerable to abuse, and given the extreme harm any action by DCS causes to families, I would assume any degree of failure to comply with the smallest infraction of personal rights would result in mandatory review. Even one day of parent-child separation in the absence of reasonable cause for a felony arrest should result in severe penalties to those involved in the action. It appears to me, that like all bureaucracies, DCS is prone to interpret every case as legitimate. This is not an accusation against DCS. It is a statement about the nature of bureaucracies, and the need for ADDED scrutiny of all bureaucratic actions. Frankly, I question the constitutionality of bureaucracies in general, because their power is delegated, and therefore unaccountable. No Government action can be unaccountable if we want to avoid its eventual degeneration into irrelevance and lawlessness, and the law of the jungle. Our Constitution is the source of all Government power, and it is the contract that legitimizes all Government power. To the extent that its various protections against intrusion are set aside, so is the power afforded by that contract. Eventually overstepping the limits of power eliminates that power, as a law of nature. Even total tyranny eventually crumbles to nothing.

  4. Being dedicated to a genre keeps it alive until the masses catch up to the "trend." Kent and Bill are keepin' it LIVE!! Thank you gentlemen..you know your JAZZ.

  5. Hemp has very little THC which is needed to kill cancer cells! Growing cannabis plants for THC inside a hemp field will not work...where is the fear? From not really knowing about Cannabis and Hemp or just not listening to the people teaching you through testimonies and packets of info over the last few years! Wake up Hoosier law makers!

ADVERTISEMENT