Pressure on the governor

August 9, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The governor has three strong candidates from which to pick our next Supreme Court justice. But does Marion Superior Judge Robyn Moberly have an edge because she’s a woman?

Chief Justice Randall Shepard has said in the past that he is confident that the next justice here would be a woman. He said this after Justice Robert Rucker was appointed in 1999, the last time we’ve had a new justice.

One could argue that if the commission members really wanted to make sure a woman named to the court, they would have given the governor three female finalists, but perhaps that would have been too obvious.

The commission’s task is to pick the best three candidates for the job, and commissioners felt that those were two men and one woman. But with all the talk and hope for a woman to sit on the state’s highest bench, is the governor going to feel pressure to go with Judge Moberly, even if she isn’t the best candidate in his eyes? Does her gender make her a more attractive candidate than the other two?

Imagine the news if the governor choose another man for the court. The story may be more about how he didn’t pick the female finalist than the congratulations and interest in the male chosen.

I would like to see a woman justice. I say that not only because I’m a woman and it’s nice to see my gender represented, but also because I know there are qualified women to serve as a justice. Judge Moberly is one of them.

Gov. Daniels doesn’t have an easy choice. Some could argue he picks Judge Moberly because she is a woman, even though she would make an excellent justice. He also has two strong candidates in Boone Circuit Judge Steven David and attorney Karl Mulvaney. While I’d like to see a woman on the bench, I wouldn’t be disappointed if Judge David or Mulvaney were picked.

Now we wait and see if Indiana joins most every other state with a female justice.
 

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. All the lawyers involved in this don't add up to a hill of beans; mostly yes-men punching their tickets for future advancement. REMF types. Window dressing. Who in this mess was a real hero? the whistleblower that let the public know about the torture, whom the US sent to Jail. John Kyriakou. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/us/ex-officer-for-cia-is-sentenced-in-leak-case.html?_r=0 Now, considering that Torture is Illegal, considering that during Vietnam a soldier was court-martialed and imprisoned for waterboarding, why has the whistleblower gone to jail but none of the torturers have been held to account? It's amazing that Uncle Sam's sunk lower than Vietnam. But that's where we're at. An even more unjust and pointless war conducted in an even more bogus manner. this from npr: "On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier." Today, the US itself has become lawless.

  2. "Brain Damage" alright.... The lunatic is on the grass/ The lunatic is on the grass/ Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs/ Got to keep the loonies on the path.... The lunatic is in the hall/ The lunatics are in my hall/ The paper holds their folded faces to the floor/ And every day the paper boy brings more/ And if the dam breaks open many years too soon/ And if there is no room upon the hill/ And if your head explodes with dark forbodings too/ I'll see you on the dark side of the moon!!!

  3. It is amazing how selectively courts can read cases and how two very similar factpatterns can result in quite different renderings. I cited this very same argument in Brown v. Bowman, lost. I guess it is panel, panel, panel when one is on appeal. Sad thing is, I had Sykes. Same argument, she went the opposite. Her Rooker-Feldman jurisprudence is now decidedly unintelligible.

  4. November, 2014, I was charged with OWI/Endangering a person. I was not given a Breathalyzer test and the arresting officer did not believe that alcohol was in any way involved. I was self-overmedicated with prescription medications. I was taken to local hospital for blood draw to be sent to State Tox Lab. My attorney gave me a cookie-cutter plea which amounts to an ALCOHOL-related charge. Totally unacceptable!! HOW can I get my TOX report from the state lab???

  5. My mother got temporary guardianship of my children in 2012. my husband and I got divorced 2015 the judge ordered me to have full custody of all my children. Does this mean the temporary guardianship is over? I'm confused because my divorce papers say I have custody and he gets visits and i get to claim the kids every year on my taxes. So just wondered since I have in black and white that I have custody if I can go get my kids from my moms and not go to jail?

ADVERTISEMENT