ILNews

Senate to vote on Judge Pratt Tuesday

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The U.S. Senate plans to vote on a Marion Superior judge’s nomination for the federal bench on Tuesday, according to a spokesman in Sen. Evan’s Bayh’s office.

LathropPratt

Senators agreed Thursday to consider the nomination of Marion Superior Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, whom the president chose in January for the Southern District of Indiana to succeed Judge David F. Hamilton. Judge Hamilton was elevated to the federal appeals bench late last year.

A roll-call vote is expected about 11:50 a.m. Tuesday, according to spokesman Brian Weiss in Bayh’s office in Washington, D.C. Whether senators will discuss her nomination or proceed directly to a vote hasn’t yet been determined.

If confirmed, Judge Pratt would be the first African-American judge on the state’s federal bench. She currently presides over the Marion Superior Probate Division, and has been in that role since serving a criminal division judge from 1997 through 2008, where she handled major felonies and presided over 20 to 35 jury trials a year. Judge Pratt was first elected in 1996, but had served as a master commissioner in Marion Superior Court since 1993 after practicing privately.

This would be the final of three confirmations for Indiana’s federal bench, all of which President Barack Obama announced in January. Earlier this week, the Senate confirmed Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson, a magistrate judge who joined the court in 2007 from Marion Superior Court. The president signed her commission this week. Senators in May confirmed banking attorney Jon DeGuilio for a seat on the federal bench in the Northern District of Indiana.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT