Terre Haute federal courthouse escapes closure

September 12, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Judicial Conference of the United States announced Tuesday that it will close six non-resident federal courthouses to save money. The facility in Terre Haute, which was placed on a list for consideration of closure earlier this year, will remain open.

The Terre Haute courthouse is no stranger to threats of closure.  Judicial officials looked at 60 federal courthouses around the country which, like the Terre Haute courthouse, do not have a full-time resident judge.

The six facilities closing are in Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas. The closures should save the judiciary around $1 million a year in rent, according to a news release from the United States Courts.

The Terre Haute facility – which opened in 2009 – was number 19 on the list.

In addition to announcing the court closures, the U.S. Judicial Conference has asked each District Court unit – clerk’s office, probation office, pretrial services office and bankruptcy court – to work together to adopt a shared administrative services plan to save money while preserving effective court operations and services.

The conference also decided to eliminate funding to print and mail court of appeals slip opinions – court opinions used prior to formal publication in case reporters. This is projected to save more than $1 million in printing and mailing costs. Courts will now provide electronic copies of slip opinions.
 
 

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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT