ILNews

Valpo, Indy law host lecture, event

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Law School Briefs

Law School Briefs is Indiana Lawyer’s new section that will highlight news from law schools in Indiana. While we have always covered law school news and will continue to keep up with law school websites and press releases for updates, we’ll gladly accept submissions for this section from law students, professors, alums, and others who want to share law school-related news. If you’d like to submit news or a photo from an event, please send it to Rebecca Berfanger, rberfanger@ibj.com, along with contact information for any follow up questions at least two weeks in advance of the issue date.

Valpo hosts lecture on same-sex marriage

Professor William Eskridge Jr. of Yale Law School will discuss “Six Myths That Confuse the Same-Sex Marriage Debate” as the guest speaker for the Valparaiso University School of Law Seegers Lecture on Jurisprudence starting at 4 p.m. Nov. 18 at the law school’s Wesemann Hall, 656 S. Greenwich St.

Those myths are: “(a) that gay marriage will have a significant impact (good or bad) on marriage; (b) that marriage equality must come through judicial activism rather than legislative reform; (c) that it is important to have a national resolution of the issue in the near future; (d) that whether lesbian and gay parents do a good job raising children will play a major role in resolving the debate; (e) that Judeo-Christian religions/faiths are inherently opposed to marriage equality; and (f) that opposition to gay marriage serves to reaffirm traditional marriage.”

Eskridge is a leader in the revival of Legislation and Statutory Interpretation as academic disciplines, according to a release from Valparaiso. He is recognized as a founder of the public law discipline Sexuality, Gender, and the Law.

In that discipline, Eskridge has published a variety of articles to define a legal and political framework for the proper treatment of sexual and gender minorities.

Historical materials in his book “Gaylaw” were the basis of an amicus brief he drafted for the Cato Institute, and that material was also used for the court’s analysis in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), which invalidated consensual sodomy laws. His most recent book is “Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse?” written with Darren Spedale.

The Seegers Lecture is named for the late Edward A. Seegers, a Chicago attorney. During his lifetime, Seegers made significant contributions toward scholarships and new buildings, and he fully endowed a law school chair in honor of his father and mother, Louis and Anna Seegers.

Although he graduated from the University of Chicago Law School, Seegers was granted honorary alumni membership by the Valparaiso University Alumni Association in 1977.

Indy Law hosted environmental event

The Hoosier Environmental Council’s third annual “Greening the Statehouse” took place Nov. 6 at Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis. The goal of the event is to educate and rally attendees on policies to advance public transit, sustainable agriculture, protection of bodies of water, and green energy. About 120 people attended.

This year, HEC partnered with various organizations from around the state to discuss strategies and tactics that will win over lawmakers and improve the environment and health of Hoosiers.

Rick Dove of North Carolina was the featured speaker and discussed the consequences of concentrated animal feeding operations. He is an advocate for Waterkeeper Alliance, an organization dedicated to preserving and protecting water from polluters, and he works with numerous Waterkeepers in various states and staff attorneys at the Waterkeeper Alliance.

Dove served in the U.S. Marines and was a military courts-martial judge on his final tour of duty. He also practiced law until becoming the Neuse Riverkeeper in 1993.

The event was hosted by the Environmental Law Society at IU School of Law – Indianapolis.•

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. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT