ILNews

Indiana's freedom fighter

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A 90-year-old Indianapolis attorney couldn’t have predicted his legal career of more than 60 years would include handling many controversial clients, including the Ku Klux Klan and conscientious objectors of the Vietnam War, among others.

Irving L. Fink had a hand in helping found two prominent statewide legal organizations – now known as the ACLU of Indiana and Indiana Legal Services. He continues to practice four days a week and has a clear memory of many of his cases over the decades.
 

ACLU main Irving Fink (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

After graduating from Northwestern University in 1941, he served in the Army for four years during World War II. His dad suggested law school, and Irving attended the University of Michigan with help from the G.I. Bill. He graduated in 1948 and was admitted to practice in Indiana in 1949.

He landed in Indianapolis thanks to an Army buddy who helped him get a job as a lawyer; he made $50 a week. Most of his career since has been as a solo or at a small firm, other than about three years at a large firm early on.

As a solo, he said he could take the cases he wanted.

For instance, even before he helped found the ACLU in Indiana in the early 1950s, the ACLU national organization based in New York offered to help him with a case in which he represented a principal who was a Jehovah’s Witness who wouldn’t salute the flag during the pledge of allegiance. He said he appreciated the offer but declined the New York organization’s help.

He would later represent Jehovah’s witnesses and others who were conscientious objectors to the Vietnam War. Some of those cases came to him through the ACLU of Indiana, and some clients found him on their own, but he was fairly sure he had handled more of those cases than other Indianapolis attorneys.

Other Vietnam War protestors he represented with the ACLU of Indiana included the “Marian 8,” a group of Marian College students who picketed outside the college president’s home and were arrested on criminal charges.

Irving filed a motion to dismiss, and the trial went forward without a ruling on the motion. At the close of trial, the judge stated that although he’d like to send them all to jail, because Irving raised important constitutional issues he felt compelled to set them free.

“My dad had a lot of respect for the judge who was upholding the Constitution over his own political beliefs,” said his daughter Elaine Fink, also a lawyer.
 

Elaine Fink mug Elaine Fink

A tougher decision for Irving involved a case in which a head of the Ku Klux Klan asked Irving to represent the organization. They wanted to march to protest a federal judge’s ruling on segregation in Indianapolis Public Schools in the early 1970s.

During the first conversation with the KKK leader, he told him, “There are two things you should know about me: I’m Jewish, and I hate everything you stand for.”

Beatrice Fink, his wife of almost 65 years, remembered telling him she was adamantly opposed to him accepting “Klan money.”

In the end he would defend the KKK’s constitutional right to march. The ACLU of Indiana backed him on the case.

Elaine said she remembered vividly when her father was representing the KKK and the effect it had on how others in the community viewed her family during that time.

“Here we are, a Jewish family, very involved in integration efforts, members of the NAACP, raised to be aware of civil rights issues,” she said.

Another case involving the ACLU of Indiana that he recalled took place in the early 1980s and involved the BMV. At that time, the governor would make political appointments – generally the county party chair of the governor’s party would be appointed to oversee the license branches. A notary fee for driver’s licenses would then go to the political party overseeing the branch, he said.

Irving and the ACLU challenged that process in federal court in 1983. By the mid-1980s, the state legislature addressed the issue and changed the statute so it was no longer OK for political parties to receive fees from licenses through these political appointments.

While Irving was no longer taking ACLU cases when current legal director Ken Falk started there in the mid-1990s, he does know Irving and thinks highly of him and his work.

“Irv has been a supporter and a cooperating attorney for the ACLU for many years,” Falk said. “I know from talking to him the work he’s done for us has been extremely import in many areas. He is a treasure to the ACLU and to the legal community. … He is just a wonderful person and has a wonderful family.”

Outside of the courtroom, Elaine recalled her father’s support of constitutional rights from two incidents involving her family.

In the early 1960s when she was around 10 years old, she remembered the family visited an amusement park in Indianapolis for the first time after it had been integrated. Shortly after they arrived at the park, Irving saw a “Whites Only” sign over a water fountain, and he had the family leave right away.

Elaine also remembered going to a movie on Christmas day at a theater in downtown Indianapolis. Because a group of union members were picketing outside the theater, Irving had his family leave. He represented unions early in his legal career and he would never cross a picket line.

At the time of both incidents, she was embarrassed and upset, Elaine said, but looking back she now understands why her father made those decisions.

She also has a better understanding as an adult and as a lawyer what he went through as an attorney in the case involving creationism in textbooks, which he believed to be a violation of the separation of church and state, and something that wasn’t appropriate in public schools. He won that case in the 1970s.

While Elaine said her parents didn’t encourage or discourage any of their five children in their career choices, Irving said he is very proud of his daughter for the work she does for poor people.

She attended New York University School of Law on a scholarship because she wanted to practice public interest law. After working for other public interest organizations, she has spent most of her legal career at the Legal Aid Society of Southwest Ohio in Cincinnati.

This work has also helped her realize why her father was involved in the formation of what is now Indiana Legal Services.
 

Norm Metzger mug Metzger

Norman Metzger, ILS executive director, became executive director of that organization in 1970 and remembered Irving’s involvement in that organization in the 1970s as a board member.

“What I remember of all these guys,” referring to Irving and others who were involved in the late 1960s and through the 1970s, “was how smart they were. They were also unflappable and very dedicated to the cause. We were so controversial in those days. Virtually every week we were in the newspaper. The city was having a hard time getting used to a legal aid organization doing things that were very litigious.”

For instance, the organization would take cases involving welfare rights and jail conditions, including whether people in prison were receiving needed medical care or if the conditions were suitable for living.

“I never once had anyone on the board of directors call and say, ‘What are you thinking? Why did you take this case?’ I think all those guys were really smart, had good educations … they just thought it was the right thing to do on behalf of poor people. … These guys were so gracious, professional, soft spoken, and supportive.”

Today, Metzger said, there are restrictions on the federal funding the ILS and other organizations supported by the Legal Services Corporations can receive, and they are no longer allowed to represent prisoners. However, the ACLU of Indiana has taken these types of cases.

Irving, who celebrated his birthday in March with family, friends, and music – something he has encouraged his children to also enjoy – is still friendly and soft spoken, but he’s not shy or afraid to talk about controversial issues.

He encouraged young attorneys to enjoy their work and not do it just for the money.

“Some of the most meaningful experiences I had as a lawyer,” he said, “were the ones where I didn’t earn a dime. … It’s important to take cases on principle and not only because of the fees.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT