ILNews

IBA: AIB Touted as 'Best Alternative'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Whether you are a sole practitioner or the managing partner of one of Indy’s largest law firms, the IndyBar’s Attorneys for an Independent Bench (“AIB”) may be the best alternative to support judicial candidates in the 2012 elections for Marion Circuit and Superior Courts.

Chaired by former Indiana Supreme Court Justice Theodore Boehm, AIB was formed to receive contributions from those within the Indiana legal community wishing to support judicial candidates without regard to political affiliation.

“Judges have become vehicles for raising funds for political parties,” Justice Boehm remarked in his public comments upon his retirement from the bench. In creating AIB, it was the intention of the Indianapolis Bar Association to address such concerns while promoting public confidence in attorneys, judges and the justice system.

All contributions received by AIB, less minimal administrative costs, will distribute equally among all judicial candidates on the certified candidate list released by the Election Division of the Indiana Secretary of State following the May 2012 primary.

Voluntary contributions to the PAC are now being accepted and will continue to be until forty-five days prior to the November 6, 2012 general election. Checks should be made to Attorneys for an Independent Bench and sent to the Indianapolis Bar Association at 135 Pennsylvania Street, Ste. 1500, Indianapolis IN 46204, or donate online at www.indybar.org/aib. A complete list of all donors will be filed timely with the Marion County Election Board.•

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT