ILNews

Patriotic Veterans seeks to lift ban on robo-calls for primary

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An Illinois-based nonprofit that wants to make political robo-calls in Indiana for the May primary has asked the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to lift a stay banning the company from doing so.

Patriotic Veterans Inc. asked the 7th Circuit to reconsider its Dec. 21 decision to allow Indiana to enforce a statute restricting out-of-state robo-calls. In its motion filed April 20, the nonprofit argues that Indiana’s May 8 primary election includes several significant contested races and the organization has been asked to “place interstate political phone calls in advance of this important election by using the technology prohibited by Indiana’s Automatic Dialing Machine Statute.”

Patriotic Veterans claims that the stay is detrimental to the organization and Indiana voters because it prevents Patriotic Veterans from “engaging in core political speech during an election cycle.”

The state opposes the motion, arguing that Patriotic Veterans cited no new facts or circumstances that justify lifting the stay. The state writes in its brief that “Indiana citizens will suffer great harm to their residential privacy if the stay is lifted and PVI acts as if it has a license to flood Indiana homes with calls.”

In September, U.S. Judge William Lawrence ruled that Indiana’s Automatic Dialing Machine Statute is preempted by federal law and the state couldn’t prevent out-of-state entities from placing political robo-calls to Hoosiers. That decision was appealed, and the stay was issued allowing Indiana to enforce the statute pending a 7th Circuit decision.

The 7th Circuit has not ruled on Patriotic Veterans’ motion.

 

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. Frankly, it is tragic that you are even considering going to an expensive, unaccredited "law school." It is extremely difficult to get a job with a degree from a real school. If you are going to make the investment of time, money, and tears into law school, it should not be to a place that won't actually enable you to practice law when you graduate.

  2. As a lawyer who grew up in Fort Wayne (but went to a real law school), it is not that hard to find a mentor in the legal community without your school's assistance. One does not need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to go to an unaccredited legal diploma mill to get a mentor. Having a mentor means precisely nothing if you cannot get a job upon graduation, and considering that the legal job market is utterly terrible, these students from Indiana Tech are going to be adrift after graduation.

  3. 700,000 to 800,000 Americans are arrested for marijuana possession each year in the US. Do we need a new justice center if we decriminalize marijuana by having the City Council enact a $100 fine for marijuana possession and have the money go towards road repair?

  4. I am sorry to hear this.

  5. I tried a case in Judge Barker's court many years ago and I recall it vividly as a highlight of my career. I don't get in federal court very often but found myself back there again last Summer. We had both aged a bit but I must say she was just as I had remembered her. Authoritative, organized and yes, human ...with a good sense of humor. I also appreciated that even though we were dealing with difficult criminal cases, she treated my clients with dignity and understanding. My clients certainly respected her. Thanks for this nice article. Congratulations to Judge Barker for reaching another milestone in a remarkable career.

ADVERTISEMENT