ILNews

Morris: Shepard's legacy is transparent government

Greg Morris
February 29, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

morris-commentaryI know a lot has been written recently about retiring Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard. The press coverage has been a glowing review of his service to Indiana residents. In fact, over the years, I’ve never heard a disparaging word about Randall Shepard. And I say — deservedly so. It has been my honor to know him.

So, I was pleased when the Hoosier State Press Association recently honored Shepard with a Frank O’Bannon Sunshine Award for his support of open government. I can’t think of a more deserving recipient.

With many state legislators observing, Judy O’Bannon, the late governor’s wife, presented the award symbolizing transparency in government to Shepard during a luncheon at the HSPA Annual Meetings and Government Conference at the Indianapolis Marriott Downtown on Feb. 16.

Shepard’s efforts to help Hoosiers understand how the court system works were lauded by O’Bannon, an owner of The Corydon Democrat newspaper, which nominated the jurist for the honor. The O’Bannon Sunshine Award, first awarded in 2005, honors an individual, group or organization demonstrating outstanding effort to protect and enhance open government in Indiana.

“Some people think the press only reports the bad news — the one bad apple in a barrel of good public officials and employees,” said HSPA executive director and general counsel Stephen Key. “The Frank O’Bannon Sunshine Award honors that golden apple — those public servants or citizens who understand that our government should be transparent to the people it serves.”

The Corydon Democrat’s nomination, submitted by Publisher Jon O’Bannon, included the following testimonial:

“Chief Justice Randy Shepard has articulated the belief that newspapers and the judiciary have a symbiotic relationship. The judiciary needs the coverage of its operations and decisions to help strengthen its role as one of the three equal branches of government, each serving as a counterweight to the other two branches. The judiciary is dependent upon the opinion of the courts by the people to give it the strength to fulfill its role, and the press is a key factor in giving the public information to form its opinion of the court system. Meanwhile, the press is reliant upon the judiciary to protect its newsgathering ability through First Amendment-related decisions. If the court doesn’t support the freedom of press, newspapers’ ability to serve as a government watchdog could be severely curtailed.

“With that view, the chief justice has taken steps to make the workings of the judiciary more transparent. Under his watch:

“n Media cameras are allowed in the appellate courts, and arguments are webcast across the Internet.

“n The Supreme Court has approved one pilot project allowing cameras in trial courtrooms and is considering a new project (approved since this nomination).

“n The Supreme Court updated its Administrative Rule 9 to take into account issues raised by a digital environment.

“n The Supreme Court issued an order reducing the incidence of trial court judges agreeing to draw a veil of secrecy around specific cases.”

Before closing, I want to take the opportunity to tout some of the chief justice’s work on a topic near and dear to me — civic engagement. Shepard has been very active in this area. The Indiana Supreme Court runs Courts in the Classroom to help educators, students, historians and interested citizens learn more about the history and operation of Indiana’s judicial branch.

Also, Shepard has been involved with the Indiana Civic Health Index project, which examines behaviors and attitudes of Hoosiers regarding civic life and explores resources and impediments that affect how citizens of Indiana participate in civic life. As an example, the information obtained in this report can help us design and implement strategies to improve voter turnout.

Shepard’s impending retirement is certainly a great loss to the court and comes on the heels of Justice Ted Boehm’s retirement in late 2010. The combined knowledge, experience and talent of these two remarkable men cannot be overstated. One bit of good news is that Boehm vowed not to disappear in retirement, and that has been the case. We can only hope and believe the same will be true of Chief Justice Randall Shepard.

Best of luck, chief justice, and congratulations on receiving the Frank O’Bannon Sunshine Award. Thanks for your outstanding service, and thank you for your efforts in protecting and enhancing open government in Indiana.•
__________

Greg Morris is publisher of Indianapolis Business Journal, sister publication to Indiana Lawyer. To comment on this column, send email to gmorris@ibj.com.

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
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