ILNews

Standing up for the judiciary

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

Indianapolis attorney Tom Schultz sees that the judiciary is under attack and, as a past president of the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana, he’s doing something about it.

He pointed to examples nationwide on how the judiciary’s independence is in danger, from the landmark Supreme Court of the United States decision in early 2010 that allowed unlimited campaign donations in judicial elections to the November 2010 general election where three Iowa Supreme Court justices lost their seats as the result of public sentiment over a decision allowing same-sex couples to marry.

schultz-thomas-mug.jpg Schultz

Indiana saw that danger after a May decision from the Indiana justices on the Barnes v. State case involving residents’ rights to resist police entry into a home. Justices received death threats, a public rally protested the decision and lawmakers formed a legislative study committee in response to the ruling. That ruling also sparked a conversation among some lawmakers that Indiana re-examine its merit selection system for appellate judges.

With those examples fueling concern within the legal community about whether judicial independence is in jeopardy, the DTCI is forming a new committee to help advocate for the third branch by educating the public and legislative leaders about the judiciary’s purpose and inner-workings.

Schultz says the things the committee may look at include overall reaction to judicial opinions, public criticism of judges or courts, issues surrounding judicial selection, and efforts to limit funding or judicial salaries. He envisions the committee working through the media, Legislature and school systems to educate lawmakers and members of the public, possibly even being a place for the media to turn for fair comment on judicial rulings.

Schultz expects those details will be worked out once the committee – which will include six to eight attorneys – starts meeting in January. Eventually, Schultz hopes the defense bar can work with the judicial and legislative branches as well as other bar associations, including the plaintiffs’ bar, to discuss judicial issues impacting attorneys and judges throughout Indiana.

“As an organization, we see that it’s apparently en vogue to attack the judiciary,” the principal partner at Schultz & Pogue said. “But while that’s a problem in itself, a bigger problem is that judges can’t stand up and defend themselves. So that falls to us, as lawyers. We need to defend the system we have and also educate people about the role of the judiciary.”

Schultz said the negative tone against lawyers sometimes clouds the public’s view of the entire legal system. He doesn’t believe an answer can be easily found by turning to tort reform or changing how judges are chosen – two elements Schultz sees as the most common responses when legislators or members of the public don’t like what the courts are doing.

“Lawyers and courts are easy targets, but many people don’t understand the basics about the system,” he said.

Indianapolis defense attorney John Trimble, a past DTCI president and member of the defense attorney advocacy group known as DRI, has been a part of national and statewide efforts studying the issue of judicial independence.

“Public perception of our judiciary is largely based on headlines and not the merits of a case as derived from the facts, law and precedent,” Trimble said. “It’s very easy for the public to criticize and lambast judicial holdings, especially now with blogs and other Internet options allowing them to voice opinions. The public lashes out against judges and urges legislators to do something about it, based on limited or no understanding of what a decision might have said.”

Other states’ defense bars have embraced efforts similar to that being undertaken by DTCI, such as in Washington where a defense bar committee joined the teacher’s association and League of Women Voters to work on shaping opinions about how judges are selected. Other jurisdictions have done the same on other court-related issues, Trimble said.

trimble_joh-mug.jpg Trimble

Those types of efforts could be duplicated by the DTCI committee, Trimble and Schultz said.

“For us lawyers, we’re the front line consumers of judicial services based on the work we do for our clients,” Trimble said. “But in generalities, we attorneys are guilty of standing idly by while our judiciary deteriorates. We get accustomed to the day-to-day operations of courts that we deal with and we don’t realize how corrosive these attacks on courts can be. If we don’t defend the courts, no one will.”

The Indiana Trial Lawyers Association supports the effort and looks forward to working with the defense bar on some of those common issues involving the judiciary, according to ITLA president and Fort Wayne attorney John O. Feighner. When judicial pay or judge selection debates have happened in the past, he said the plaintiffs and defense bars have worked along with the Indiana State Bar Association to address those concerns on the public and legislative fronts.

“We all want to see the courts treated fairly and that transcends the boundaries of who we represent and which side we’re on,” he said.

For the ISBA, the educational effort is already underway as it works to make sure the decision-makers in the General Assembly understand the legal system and how the courts are meant to function. The ISBA held its first-ever Law School for Legislators prior to Organization Day in mid-November. Organizers believe it was the first of its kind in the nation.

ISBA legislative counsel Paje Felts said the decreasing number of practicing attorneys in the General Assembly means that fewer legislators know the practical impacts of the legislation they’re considering and passing. This is becoming an even more important trend now that Indiana is expected to lose several key lawyer-legislators who plan on not running for re-election, Felts said.

“When you look at the numbers, it looks like the amount of lawyers has risen,” she said of her count of 26 legislators who have law licenses. “But so many haven’t practiced and don’t really understand these issues we see in the legal community. Lawyers have to bring this knowledge to the table.”

At the legislative law school, Felts said legislators were able to discuss issues such as how their legislative mandates impact administrative law and more general topics such as judicial selection and the interaction between the legislative and judicial branches.

Whether it’s led by the DTCI, another bar association or other organization, Felts said the educational aspect is what is important about any effort focusing the judiciary.•
 

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. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

  4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

ADVERTISEMENT