ILNews

Government shutdown would have little impact on federal legal system

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Even if the U.S. Congress fails to pass a short-term budget measure and prevent a government shutdown before midnight Friday, the various arms of the Indiana federal legal community will remain operating mostly as usual – at least for the time being.

The clock is ticking toward 12 a.m. when a one-week stopgap resolution expires. If federal lawmakers and President Barack Obama don’t break the impasse, most nonessential government services will come to a halt. Negotiations have been ongoing all day and both political sides agreed on $38 billion in spending cuts, but no final resolution had been reached by deadline for this story.

At the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, spokeswoman Karen Redmond said the judiciary would use non-appropriated fees to continue full operations for the first weeks of a government shutdown. Each appellate, District, and bankruptcy court – as well as the judges – would continue those operations as part of their exercise of judicial power, and each would individually determine the number of court staff, probation, and pretrial service officers necessary to adequately maintain those court services. Notices are posted on each of Indiana’s federal courts, including the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, about how the shutdown would impact that court.

Clerk Laura Briggs in the Southern District said the court might have to limit its operations to those services deemed necessary and essential – such as accepting new cases – if a shutdown lasts longer than two weeks.

Since the courts will be open on Monday regardless, Briggs said that a planned event featuring 7th Circuit Judge Ann C. Williams will proceed as scheduled after initially being pushed back from February because of inclement weather.

But not everything would go on as usual.

Both U.S. Attorney’s Office districts directed questions to the Department of Justice, and spokesman Robert O’Donnell responded that all criminal litigation will continue without any interruption as “an activity essential to the safety of human life and the protection of property.”

“If there is a government shutdown, the Department will be forced to stop or significantly curtail an array of different activities and services that will have a national impact, including most civil litigation, community outreach to victims of crime, and the processing of grants,” he wrote in an email.

One question that concerns Chief Judge Richard Young in the Southern District of Indiana is whether background checks on potential magistrates will continue, impacting the ongoing review of Indianapolis attorney Denise LaRue who was confirmed as a federal magistrate judge earlier this year. She’d be able to begin as soon as a background check is complete since funding for the new position was authorized to begin April 1.

It wasn’t immediately clear if a shutdown would impact the Federal Community Defenders in Indiana, as some nationally have said they have enough funding on hand to continue operating on a temporary basis.
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT