ILNews

New lawyers advised to remember the oath during their careers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana’s newest lawyers were admitted to practice Wednesday at an Indianapolis ceremony where they were advised to “think like a lawyer” and remember the oath they have taken to support and defend the Constitution.

At the Indiana Supreme Court admission ceremony, 137 lawyers took oaths to be admitted to practice in Indiana, as well as in the U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts.

Chief Judge Nancy Vaidik talked about thinking like a lawyer — being analytical, rejecting quick thoughts, seeing the world in shades of gray instead of black and white.

“I realized I had fundamentally changed in law school and so have you,” she told the new lawyers, joking the process was like the Vulcan mind meld from “Star Trek.”

She noted in today’s political climate, more people need to think like lawyers. Indiana Supreme Court Justice Mark Massa in his remarks also talked about how today’s times are challenging — both for the legal profession and in general. He urged lawyers to be the first to come to the defense of free-speech challenges.

Natural-born U.S. citizens do not have to take an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution — only those in the military, public service and lawyers, he pointed out.

“Remember the oath always as you report to duty tomorrow,” he said. On behalf of the Indiana Supreme Court, “welcome to the bar, and welcome to the fight.”
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Legal physicians, heal thyselves
    It is not the powerless attorneys who need to be directed to uphold the constitutions. It is the powerful, like those Hoosier attorneys and judges who "extreme vetted" me over my religion ... to keep me out of the bar, and then banished me for life for daring to blow the whistle on their founders'denying double standards and constitution-violating ways. What attorney, fresh out of law school, would ever believe that this question can be asked in a bar admission hearing, as was put to me: “My question is direct, is that correct … do you firmly believe that you’re obligated as a Christian to put obedience to God’s law above human law? That’s my question to you?” “Is that assessment correct? The question is, is that assessment correct?” Force to choose between my Saviour/King and the Hoosier judiciary, I chose Jesus. And my family has paid a very dear price, much like Soviet Christians put to the same vetting by statist Kommissars. Details here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners SO YES, LET us all hold fast to the constitutions. I did, and as a whistleblower against powerful Hoosier Kommisars am now forbidden, for the rest of my life, from ever re-applying to the Indiana bar .... after passing the Indiana bar exam, which they did allow me to sit for .. despite grave concerns about my loyalty to their brand of rabid secularism. Doctors of the law, heal thyselves before preaching to those young and idealistic unpolluted ones who know better... and see through your rampant corruption.

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. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  2. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  3. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  4. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

  5. Unlike the federal judge who refused to protect me, the Virginia State Bar gave me a hearing. After the hearing, the Virginia State Bar refused to discipline me. VSB said that attacking me with the court ADA coordinator had, " all the grace and charm of a drive-by shooting." One does wonder why the VSB was able to have a hearing and come to that conclusion, but the federal judge in Indiana slammed the door of the courthouse in my face.

ADVERTISEMENT