A Terre Haute attorney wants the nation’s highest court to review two appellate cases out of Indiana and Wisconsin that uphold judicial canons and pose free speech questions about what judicial candidates can say or do when campaigning for office.
A court with authority to hear defamation and invasion of privacy claims is not ousted of subject matter jurisdiction just because a defendant pleads a religious defense, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
Indiana’s two federal appeals judges disagree about whether the full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals should reconsider
a Wisconsin case about the judicial code of conduct in that state, paving the way for a further battle before the nation’s
highest court that could influence Indiana’s judicial canons.
At a time when the legal community is caught up in controversies about how judges are selected and whether they can remain
impartial, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has weighed in on that national debate and ruled that states have the authority
to self-regulate on those issues as it relates to judicial canons.
State officials are prohibiting people convicted and incarcerated for misdemeanor offenses from voting while they are behind
bars, but that could change if a federal suit is successful.
The Indiana Court of Appeals was faced with competing constitutional rights today: a mother’s right to free political
speech versus her daughter’s right to privacy as to whether her father allegedly sexually abused her.
A federal judge in Fort Wayne is deciding whether the state's judicial conduct code should be able to restrict judicial candidates from answering surveys about views on issues they might someday hear in court.