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. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT