What we want to address here is the troubling descent into madness that has appeared alongside the reasonable discourse on the subject of the recent Indiana Supreme Court decision Barnes v. State .
It’s at the end of House Bill 1266, and we have no idea whether the legislation has a chance at passage by the April 29 session deadline, but we had to go back and read it twice before we believed what we were seeing.
They’re back, and like most citizens who watch with interest the goings on in the Indiana General Assembly, we’re not sure it’s altogether a good thing.
At more than 30 days and counting, at least at Indiana Lawyer deadline, we’re not sure what will cause the Democrats elected to the Indiana House of Representatives to return to their posts at the Statehouse.
When you post a comment to a story on a media website, you are responsible for your words. At least that is the case at this time. Contrary to that opinion, many people think hiding behind an anonymous identity online should be a protected right.
There’s a lot of shouting and political posturing going on, but we’re not at all certain there’s much in the way of listening and compromising taking place.
Judges Mark Stoner and Terry Shewmaker explain why a proposed bill would protect Hoosiers’ rights by making sure that law-trained judges preside over all cases in Indiana.
We often think of law enforcement officers and firefighters as first-responder types who venture into situations where others are reluctant to go. We’d like to expand the definition of first responder a bit, and bring your attention to an Indianapolis lawyer who after retiring from his day job years ago decided he wasn’t quite done practicing law.
In our culture, someone accused of a crime gets a vigorous defense to make certain all of the accused person’s constitutional rights are protected. This is as it should be. Those faced with the loss of their liberty or life deserve no less than the best defense that can be put forth.
Here’s to hoping reason and sanity will prevail, but we’re not holding our breath.
An anonymous young lawyer in Indianapolis discusses her anxiety issues and the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program.
It’s a silent and devastating problem going on right under our noses, and it’s going to take courage and a willingness to ask invasive and uncomfortable questions to stop it.
This was one retirement ceremony we were not looking forward to attending, fearing that the gentleman stepping away from the bench would slip away from public life and live quietly with his family, indulging his interests outside the law, while working as a mediator at Van Winkle Baten Rimstidt and senior judging for the Indiana Court of Appeals.
The state still needs to address the elephant in the room.
Here at the newspaper, we don’t like to see anything put the brakes on the sharing of opinions.
A few days after then-U.S. District Court Judge David Hamilton ruled in late 2005 in Anthony Hinrichs, et al. v. Brian Bosma, et al., that sectarian prayer could not be used to open legislative sessions, we received a phone call from someone who wanted the judge’s e-mail address and contact information. We declined to give that information.
Casting a ballot in an election ought to be a simple thing for a citizen to do. But there are those who would make it as difficult
as possible for some to exercise their franchise.
We believe the state of Indiana has hit bone with a budget cut instituted earlier this month.
The future is now for the high court.