ILNews

Indy 7th Circuit Conference to host Roberts, Kagan, Lugar

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

United States Chief Justice John G. Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan and former Sen. Richard G. Lugar are featured speakers at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the 7th Circuit Bar Association and Judicial Conference opening Sunday in Indianapolis.

Roberts will address the bar during its annual dinner at 6:30 p.m. Monday with introductions by Kagan and 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook.

Faegre Baker Daniels LLP partner Chris Scanlon, president of the 7th Circuit Bar Association, said Friday that seating is limited to 650 people for Roberts’ address, but a few registration slots remain. Online registration is closed, but event registration will be available beginning at 1 p.m. Sunday at the JW Marriott, located at the corner of West and Washington streets.  

Kagan will deliver remarks at the annual luncheon for members of the judiciary Tuesday at 12:30 p.m.
 
Lugar will speak at the 7th Circuit bar’s annual luncheon at 12:30 p.m. Monday. 7th Circuit Judge John Tinder noted that Lugar, during his 36 years in the Senate, has confirmed every current federal judge in Indiana.

The conference formally opens at 6 p.m. Sunday with a cocktail reception in Eli Lilly Hall at the Indiana History Center, 450 W. Ohio St. A full schedule of programs begins Monday morning and continues through midday Tuesday, when members of the federal judiciary will convene in executive session.


 

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