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. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT