Indiana

Will voters oust Indiana Supreme Court justices over abortion decision on Election Day?

Published

2 weeks ago

October 21, 2024

Will voters oust Indiana Supreme Court justices over abortion decision on Election Day?

Voters in Indiana don’t get a direct say in who gets to serve on the Indiana Supreme Court, but they do get to weigh in this fall on whether some of those justices get to stay in their roles.

Three of five Indiana Supreme Court justices will be up for retention vote on Nov. 5. Voters will be asked whether Chief Justice Loretta Rush, Justice Mark Massa and Justice Derek Molter, all appointed under Republican governors, should serve additional terms.

While judge retention elections are typically sleepy affairs in Indiana, that isn’t true this year. The retention question has attracted more attention due to past court decisions: namely, upholding Indiana’s abortion ban.

The Indiana Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s near-total abortion ban in 2023 in a 4-1 decision. Molter wrote the opinion, to which Rush and Massa agreed, that the state has an interest in “protecting prenatal life” and that the Indiana General Assembly “retains broad legislative discretion for determining whether and the extent to which to prohibit abortions.”

That has led to a campaign against them from abortion-rights voters who want to make their displeasure heard over the court’s decision.

“Justices Rush, Massa, and Molter are responsible in part for Indiana’s abortion ban,” according to a Facebook post from MADVoters Indiana, an advocacy group that has been supporting Indiana’s Democratic candidates. “We can hold them accountable for their decision at the ballot box.”

Meanwhile, a group called the Committee to Preserve the Indiana Supreme Court recently launched to defend the records of Rush, Massa and Molter.

“The court’s body of work shows a dedication to the constitution and interpreting the law as written,” according to the group’s Facebook page. “You won’t find judicial activists on the Indiana Supreme Court. Because here, they interpret the law — they don’t write it.”

Who are the justices?

All of the justices on the Indiana Supreme Court were appointed by Republican governors after a merit selection process by a judicial commission. The three up for retention vote this fall are:

Chief Justice Loretta Rush: appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels in 2012 and first retained by voters in 2014. She was named the state’s first woman chief justice in 2014. She was a longtime attorney in the Lafayette area and served as a superior court judge in Tippecanoe County. She has worked at the national level to address issues including courts’ responses to the mental health crisis through the Conference of Chief Justices and served as chair of the National Judicial Opioid Task Force.
Justice Mark Massa: appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels in 2012 and first retained by voters in 2014. Massa started his career as a journalist in Indiana and then entered politics, serving under former Gov. Robert Orr. He then was a deputy prosecutor and an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of Indiana. He also was part of the Daniels administration, serving as general counsel.
Derek Molter: appointed by Gov. Eric Holcomb in 2022. This is Molter’s first retention vote. He most recently served on the Court of Appeals and is from Newton County. He used to be a partner in Ice Miller law firm’s litigation practice group, where he worked on appeals in state and federal courts.

What is the judicial retention process?

Indiana’s judicial retention process serves as a “check on their performance” at periodic intervals, according to the Indiana Judicial branch website. It was put in place in 1970 after Indiana voters approved a constitutional amendment.

“Judges who are candidates for retention are not permitted to campaign or solicit public support or campaign funds unless there is organized opposition to their retention,” according to the Indiana Judicial Branch website.

If one or more of the judges is not retained, Indiana would use the judicial nomination commission to select a new lawyer, and the Indiana governor would make the appointment from a list of nominees by the commission.

“Once appointed, a justice or judge must stand for a retention election at the first statewide general election after the justice or judge had served for two full years and, if retained, every 10 years thereafter,” according to the Indiana Judicial Branch.

A referendum on abortion?

Some abortion-rights voters appear to be using the retention votes as a way to express displeasure over the state’s near total abortion ban.

The outcome of the retention vote wouldn’t directly impact the state’s ban, however. It could even backfire for abortion-rights voters, wrote Sheila Kennedy, an emerita law and public policy professor at Indiana University’s School of Public and Environmental Affairs, since a Republican governor would likely be in charge of the judicial nomination process, barring an upset win by Democratic governor candidate Jennifer McCormick.

“I share the anger of people who oppose Indiana’s ban, but our animus should be directed at the legislature–not at a court that, rightly or wrongly, held that the legislature had authority to act,” Kennedy wrote in a recent blog post.

Outgoing state Rep. Jerry Torr, R-Carmel, said in a Facebook post that he believed the justices are “always fair, unbiased and objective” even if he doesn’t agree with them.

“It’s quite possible that one or more of the justices might even have voted against the bill had they been in the legislature,” Torr said. “Their decision was not about whether the law was appropriate, but simply whether or not it was constitutional.”

What do Indiana lawyers think?

Hundreds of members of the Indiana State Bar Association expressed support for retaining all three judges in its latest retention poll, released Oct. 8.

Rush had the strongest support among those polled, with 88% of the 397 respondents voting saying she should be retained. Massa and Molter each had support of 84% of those polled.

“Lawyers are uniquely qualified to evaluate members of the judiciary, as it’s important to evaluate a judicial officer on their track record rather than a single ruling,” according to a press release from the bar association.

The poll, however, represents a small slice of lawyers in Indiana. There were 6,901 attorneys who were invited to take the poll and the organization has about 10,000 members.

Hayleigh Colombo is the senior government accountability reporter from IndyStar. She can be reached at hcolombo@indystar.com.

Source link

Click to comment

Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court case mulls whether counties can strip health insurance from elected officials • Indiana Capital Chronicle

Published

4 hours ago

November 1, 2024

Press Room

Indiana Supreme Court case mulls whether counties can strip health insurance from elected officials • Indiana Capital Chronicle

Are elected officials entitled to health insurance regardless of the number of hours they work?

That question is before the Indiana Supreme Court, who heard arguments in a Perry County case Thursday that could have statewide implications for local officials.

The case began after the Perry County commissioners discontinued health insurance coverage for certain part-time county employees in June 2023. A Perry County councilman, Keith Huck, sued and sought an injunction to keep his insurance. He works about nine hours a month, according to evidence in the case.

A local judge granted Huck’s injunction, but the Indiana Court of Appeals disagreed. The appeal to the Indiana Supreme court is interlocutory, meaning it is occurring while the case is ongoing.

“This court should declare that local unit elected officials who work less than 30 hours a week should be part-time employees for purposes of group health benefits,” said attorney Maggie Smith, representing Perry County.

“Exempting all local unit elected officials from being considered part-time employees will have such a drastic fiscal impact on the public’s fisc that such an exemption should be the result of a public policy decision of the Legislature, and that has not happened yet,” she added.

Need to get in touch?

Have a news tip?

She argued that state law gives local units the right to not offer health insurance to part-time employees and that’s what Perry County did when facing a fiscal crisis.

The decision impacted 12 of the 21 local elected officials they deemed part-time, including the Perry County commissioners who made the decision.

Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush pointed out that state law says elected county officials are not required to report hours and can’t determine or change compensation based on the number of hours worked. She asked if insurance is part of compensation.

Smith said it isn’t part of compensation at the county level and said counties are allowed to exempt part-time employees from health care benefits. She also acknowledged confusion between statutes.

“I agree with you that these statutes, as is sometimes the case, are not the pillar of clarity, but the answer to that in this case is precisely why this court should not create rights that have such a significant financial impact,” she said.

Justice Geoffrey Slaughter said county council members on the same board could work different hours and therefore one could be eligible for insurance and the other not. Supreme Court Justice Mark Massa also noted there are elected county prosecutors in smaller communities that might not meet 30 hours a week.

Attorney Robert Burkart, representing Huck, said a county can choose not to offer insurance at all, but if they do, then elected officials have a right to participate.

Slaughter questioned that contention: “Essential to your argument is that the county cannot treat elected officials as part-time employees. But where does it say that?”

Burkart said justices must look at a progression of statutes from 1957 to 1990 and to a non-binding attorney general opinion from 1978.

“Basically, the General Assembly giveth and only the General Assembly can taketh away from elected officials if the insurance is offered,” he said.

The court also has to consider whether Huck losing county-paid insurance counts as irreparable harm that would require an injunction. Smith said Huck could have gone on COBRA insurance or bought a plan on the marketplace.

But Burkart said the plans would have different levels of protection and there would be continuity of care issues.

But Slaughter said Huck can receive damages at the end of the case if he wins to cover his losses.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Source link

Indiana

Indiana Workforce Summit highlights need for strategic talent retention

Published

12 hours ago

October 31, 2024

Press Room

Indiana Workforce Summit highlights need for strategic talent retention

INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) — As Indiana continues to shape its workforce for the future, leaders emphasize the importance of strategizing and collaborating to retain diverse talent from local and global sources.

The recent 2024 Indiana Workforce Summit underscored those goals, featuring insights from key figures in workforce development.

Among them was Emil Ekiyor, chief executive officer at InnoPower and a News 8 contributor. He is also an advocate for workforce diversity.

Ekiyor talked about Indiana’s initiatives to attract and sustain a diverse workforce.

Ekiyor highlighted foundational skills that are valued in Indiana’s workforce.

He also pointed to fresh, actionable strategies discussed at the summit that should be on the radar for Indiana’s workforce development efforts.

Source link

Indiana

Indiana aims for program's first 9-0 start at Michigan State

Published

20 hours ago

October 31, 2024

Press Room

Indiana aims for program's first 9-0 start at Michigan State

EAST LANSING, Mich. (AP) — No. 13 Indiana hopes the milestone moments do not end anytime soon.

The Hoosiers already produced the most lopsided win in school history, 77-3 over Western Illinois, and matched the most lopsided Big Ten win in school history, 56-7 over Nebraska.

Indiana (8-0, 5-0) will be aiming for its next target when it visits Michigan State (4-4, 2-3) as the Hoosiers have never started the season with nine consecutive wins in the program’s 137 years.

“Our goal is to really go 1-0 each week,” said Indiana cornerback D’Angelo Ponds, who was named the Big Ten Defensive Player of the Week following his two interceptions Saturday against Washington. “We’re definitely not satisfied with just 8-0. We didn’t come here to say we wanted to be 8-0. We’re not satisfied at all.”

Indiana has kept its record unblemished because of the way it starts and finishes games. The Hoosiers are the nation’s only team that has held all of its opponents scoreless in the first quarter, piling up an 87-0 advantage. They have also played particularly well in the fourth quarter, outscoring opponents 101-20.

“I think we’re executing well to start the game,” said Indiana coach Curt Cignetti, who is the first FBS coach to post consecutive 8-0 starts at different schools. “In the fourth quarter, we’ve been strong. Probably credit to a lot of things. I think a lot of times we just built that momentum because we’ve been scoring and kind of distancing ourselves from whoever it is we’re playing.”

That momentum has resulted in double-digit margins of victory in all eight games and enabled Indiana to be one of two teams to never trail this season.

Quarterback Kurtis Rourke’s status

Cignetti is hopeful that Rourke will return to the starting lineup Saturday after missing one game due to surgery on his right thumb.

If Rourke doesn’t play, Tayven Jackson will make his second straight start. If Rourke plays, the big question will be how effectively he can grip the ball and throw accurately, something he struggled with before leaving the Nebraska game.

“Optimistic on Kurtis Rourke,” Cignetti said at his weekly news conference Monday. “He’s thrown the last few days, building up. Workload will increase as the week goes on. That’s all I’m going to say about it.”

Rourke, who has the best passing efficiency (188.70) among FBS quarterbacks, has 1,941 passing yards with 15 touchdowns and just three interceptions in seven starts.

Michigan State’s appeal denied

Michigan State will be missing linebacker Jordan Turner for the first half of Saturday’s game as the Big Ten denied his appeal of a targeting ejection during last week’s game against Michigan.

Turner’s targeting came on the final play of the third quarter, when he lowered his helmet and was determined to hit the helmet of Michigan quarterback Alex Orji. The review occurred between the third and fourth quarters.

Turner, a transfer from Wisconsin and a co-captain, leads the Spartans in tackles (48), tackles for a loss (7.5) and is tied for the team high in sacks (three).

Chewing the clock

Michigan State has improved dramatically this season with its time of possession, and that will be important as the Spartans attempt to slow down Indiana’s high-powered offense.

“Keeping other offenses off the field is big for our team in general, just giving us a chance to score. And also, it’s making it harder for them to get on the field and score,” Michigan State quarterback Aidan Chiles said. “It just takes up more time. It basically just puts us in better positions to win the game.”

Michigan State ranks 21st in the nation in time of possession at 31:48. The Spartans have not for the course of a season held the ball more than their opponent since 2019.

Source link