Judicial retention

Critics blast Marion County judge-selection proposals

January 11, 2017
Dave Stafford
Legislation assuring partisan balance on the bench has key stakeholder and lawmaker support.
More

Legislation would extend Marion Superior judges’ terms

January 5, 2017
Dave Stafford
A proposal for a new judicial selection system for Indianapolis would require term extensions for all 36 Marion Superior judges, the bill’s author said.
More

Merit selection, with recommendations for voters, proposed for Indy bench

January 4, 2017
Dave Stafford
A bill in the Indiana General Assembly would establish merit selection for Marion Superior judges, but Indianapolis’ version would also include recommendations from the judicial selection committee on whether voters should retain judges.
More

ISBA poll shows strong support for COA judges’ retention

October 5, 2016
IL Staff
A recently completed poll of Indiana State Bar Association members shows strong support for the four Indiana Court of Appeals judges seeking retention in the Nov. 8 general election.
More

Website set up for COA judges facing retention vote

July 18, 2016
IL Staff
Indiana’s state courts have established a website with information about four Indiana Court of Appeals judges facing retention on the November ballot.
More

Comment sought on reappointment of magistrate

December 3, 2015
IL Staff
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana wants to know whether a magistrate judge should be reappointed to a new eight-year term.
More

Retiring Indiana justice praises state selection process

November 30, 2015
 Associated Press
An Indiana Supreme Court justice who is stepping down says he believes the state's process for picking his replacement contributes to public confidence in the court system.
More

All appeals judges retained by voters

November 5, 2014
IL Staff
The four Indiana appellate judges up for retention this year received approval from voters Tuesday.
More

ISBA members say ‘yes’ to retaining appellate judges

October 8, 2014
IL Staff
The four Indiana appellate judges up for retention next month have the approval of ISBA members, according to survey results released Tuesday by the organization. Members overwhelmingly voted that the judges should be retained.
More

Public asked to comment on magistrate’s reappointment

August 6, 2014
IL Staff
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana is accepting comments on whether Magistrate Judge Craig M. McKee should be recommended for reappointment.
More

Court seeks comment on reappointment of Magistrate Cosbey

May 2, 2013
IL Staff
The U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Indiana is now accepting comment on whether Magistrate Judge Roger Cosbey should be reappointed when his term expires Jan 2, 2014.
More

Indiana Sen. Mike Delph's bills raise brows in legal community

February 13, 2013
Dave Stafford
Senator drops "loser pays" attorney fees plan, but other bills target grand juries and propose retention supermajority.
More

2012 Year in Review

January 2, 2013
IL Staff
2012 was another busy year for the legal community. We welcomed new justices and a new chief justice, witnessed the beginnings of the state’s fifth law school, and saw local stories garner national and international attention. Here’s a look back at the top news stories from last year.
More

All appellate judges on the ballot retained by voters

November 7, 2012
IL Staff
Collecting more than a million “yes” votes each, Indiana Justices Steven David and Robert Rucker have been retained in office. David faced opposition from some who disagreed with the majority opinion he authored regarding unlawful police entry into homes.
More

Tea party radio ad opposes David’s retention; Shepard gives backing

November 2, 2012
Dave Stafford
Indianapolis Tea Party Corp. has produced a radio advertisement critical of Justice Steven David ahead of his retention vote on Tuesday.
More

Signs of dissent in retention vote

October 24, 2012
Dave Stafford
Justice Steven David's Barnes opinion finding no right to resist unlawful police entry results in an unusual ouster effort on an otherwise quiet appellate judicial ballot.
More

Lucas: More information is needed when judging the judges

October 24, 2012
Kelly Lucas
Up the street and around the corner from my Broad Ripple house, a yard sign caught my eye that didn’t involve the usual Democrat versus Republican political rhetoric. This simple, hand-painted sign called for the ouster of Supreme Court Justice Steven David.
More

Justice David creates retention website

October 22, 2012
Dave Stafford
Facing opposition over an opinion regarding unlawful police entry, Indiana Supreme Court Justice Steven David has established a website in an unusual effort to campaign for retention.
More

ISBA members approve of appellate judges up for retention

October 16, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana State Bar Association has released results of its 2012 Judicial Retention Poll. None of the six appellate judges up for retention in the Indiana Supreme Court or Court of Appeals received less than 81 percent of “yes” votes.
More

Survey says: retain 2 Lake County judges

October 15, 2012
IL Staff
Respondents to a recent survey conducted by the Lake County Bar Association on two judges up for retention this year have recommended the judges be retained.
More

Court launches 2012 retention site

July 17, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Division of State Court Administration has designed a retention website for voters to learn about the six appellate judges up for retention this November.
More

Supreme Court Justice Rucker to run for retention

July 11, 2012
Dave Stafford
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Robert Rucker will stand for retention, ending speculation that he might become the fourth justice to step down in the last two years.
More

Indiana Judges Association: Is it time for an electoral college for judges?

May 9, 2012
David Dreyer
Some people just do not like judges. But according to Indiana University Maurer School of Law professor Charles Geyh, most people do – at least up to a point.
More

Attorney survey on Marion County judiciary begins

January 9, 2012
Michael Hoskins
Eighteen Marion County judges will be on the ballot in the May 2012 primary. The Indianapolis Bar Association is asking attorneys to voice their opinions about those jurists.
More

Federalist Society to host talk on judicial selection

January 9, 2012
IL Staff
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, Indianapolis Lawyers Division Chapter, will host a talk on judicial selection Tuesday.
More
Page  1 2 3 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  2. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  3. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  4. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  5. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

ADVERTISEMENT