ILNews

Hebenstreit: Judicial Elections Just Around the Corner

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitI know, the elections are over and everyone wants to get back to normal life again … but the process is beginning again.

One of the bedrocks of a solid democracy is the ability of citizens to air their differences before a fair and impartial judiciary. In Marion County, we have been blessed with a solid group of judges which we certainly hope will continue. The judges in Marion County are elected in the General Elections to serve a term of 6 years. There are 2 groups of judges who are elected in differing years. The next group will be up for election next November when we all go to the polls to vote for President and Governor, but the real decisions will be made long before that. In fact, the judicial candidates have been making the political rounds for some time already.

Under the current system, there will likely be 10 judicial candidates from each major political party on the November ballot. Typically, all 20 will be elected as it is unusual to see third party candidates run, let alone win. Thus, the true contest occurs at the slating conventions and in the Primary election. Each party holds a slating convention in February and recommends the 10 candidates that party hopes will be on the November ballot. Other candidates may participate in the Primary election in May 2012, and the 10 who have the highest number of votes of each party will be on the ballot for the General election.

The debate continues about whether it is better to have the general electorate choose judges or have some other process. In smaller counties, it is not uncommon for the citizens to actually know the judicial candidates and be able to express their personal opinion at the polls. That is dramatically different in Marion County. By and large, most voters have no idea about the qualifications of the judicial candidates and many lawyers who are not litigators probably do not know either. That is the reason for JEPAC.

Who better to determine the qualifications of the judiciary than the attorneys who practice in front of those judges on a daily basis? The stated purpose for JEPAC is “to conduct and publicize non-partisan evaluations of Marion County judicial candidates to promote the fair and effective selection of qualified judicial candidates in Marion County.” Over the years, the process has undergone many changes.

In the past, the members of JEPAC have individually interviewed the candidates and made recommendations. In the most recent judicial elections, with the assistance of a Wabash College professor, the Board of JEPAC created a written survey. That survey is then submitted to all attorneys who have entered an appearance in the Marion County Clerk’s office within the last three years for response. It reaches in excess of 8,000 attorneys, and requests that the responding attorneys only evaluate the candidates with whom they have had personal contact or knowledge. The survey is quite comprehensive and covers a number of criteria for evaluating the competence, demeanor and professionalism of the candidates. After tabulation, the results are published to assist the general public make an informed decision when at the polls.

This year, the work of JEPAC will be accelerated. Since the selection of candidates takes place at the respective party’s slating conventions (usually held in February), the results will be ready prior to those conventions. According to the Resolution creating JEPAC, members of the PAC are selected by the President of the IndyBar. Since a good bit of the work of the PAC will be accomplished during Scott Chinn’s term of office, he and I each had input in the selection of the members. Past President of the IndyBar, Joe Russell, and Past President of the IBF, Lante Earnest, have agreed to co-lead the PAC as the Chair and Treasurer respectively. There is an even presence of Republican, Democrat and Independent representation on the Board. Under their leadership, the 2011-2012 evaluations will be determined and published.

As with any human endeavor, there is room for conflict and disagreement. Nevertheless, JEPAC has proven to be an effective method of evaluating the judicial candidates who will be elected by the citizens of Marion County. If you receive one of the evaluations, please take the time to respond in a fair and thoughtful manner. Our clients and the citizens of Marion County deserve to continue to have a competent and professional judiciary to resolve their disputes.•

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