« Ind. Courts - Carroll County judges find their voice | Main | Ind. Decisions - Monday COA opinions now available; 1 (and 5 NFP) »

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Federal court grants preliminary injunction re judicial speech rights

On April 18th, according to a press release issued on that day by attorney James Bopp, Jr., quoted in this ILB entry:

Two Indiana judicial candidates filed suit today in federal court to block enforcement of Indiana rules prohibiting them from responding to a survey asking their views on abortion, euthanasia, and other issues.
The filings are available via this April 21st ILB entry, including a motion for a TRO. An update re the reassignment of the case to Judge Springmann is here, from April 23rd.

Today Judge Springmann has issued a 36-page opinion and order in the case of Torrey Bauer, et al. v. Randall T. Shepard, et al., granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of certain provisions of the Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct

Judge Springmann's opinion concludes:

The Court, having considered all the evidence and argument presented by the parties, and having evaluated and balanced the preliminary injunction factors, finds that the Plaintiffs have shown that a preliminary injunction is warranted in this case. The Plaintiffs have demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of succeeding on the merits and that they will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not issued. The harm to the Plaintiffs in denying the request outweighs the harm to the Defendants in granting it.

It is worth emphasizing that at the preliminary injunction stage, the Plaintiffs have not been required to prove their case in full. A preliminary injunction is merely meant to maintain the relative positions of the parties until the case can be resolved on the merits. Accordingly, only the injunction is binding on the parties; the factual and legal conclusions in this opinion are not binding as the case moves forward.

Finally, as some of the other courts that have addressed these questions have observed, the injunction requested by the Plaintiffs merely precludes enforcement of the judicial canons to sanction candidates for answering the IRL questionnaire. The injunction does not require that candidates answer the questionnaire.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 6, 2008 02:03 PM
Posted to Ind Fed D.Ct. Decisions