ILNews

We The People crowns state champions

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After three days of competition among more than 600 high school and middle school students, teams from Fishers and Nashville took the top spots in the Indiana We The People program.

Fishers High School won the high school division and Brown County Junior High School in Nashville won the middle school division. Both teams will represent Indiana in the national competitions held in April in Washington, D.C.

The Indiana Bar Foundation sponsored the We The People competition. Students competed Dec. 15 -17 in Indianapolis.

“Six thousand Indiana students are learning how to be good citizens through this educational model annually,” said Charles Dunlap, executive director of the IBF. “Indiana’s legal community is proud to bring this exemplary program here.”

In the high school division, Munster High School from Munster placed second and Hamilton Southeastern High School, also in Fishers, came in third.

Among the middle school teams, St. Richards School in Indianapolis and Helfrich Park Middle School in Evansville finished second and third, respectively.  

We The People is an education program that teaches students in fifth, eighth and 12th grades about the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. After a semester of study about American history and constitutional philosophy, current events and applicable court cases, students testify in mock congressional hearings before panels of volunteer judges from the legal community.

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT