Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Ind. Courts - Indianapolis Tea Party takes to air with anti-Justice David ad
A reader tells me he has heard the ad this morning on WIBC.
Now you can listen to it too, via the link at the end of this press release.
Some quotes from the news release:
The Indianapolis Tea Party is recommending that voters be informed this year on the retention vote of Justice Steven David. Rick Barr, spokesperson for the Indianapolis Tea Party, said, Many folks come to the voting booth prepared to vote on their local, state, and federal candidates but forget about retention votes of Appellate Court judges and Supreme Court justices. * * *ILB: Another view on the Barnes decision and its aftermath is given in IU McKinney law professor Joel Schumm's opinion piece, first posted in the ILB on Oct. 26th. It also appeared yesterday as a "My View" item in the Indianapolis Star. In pertinent part, Schumm wrote:
On May 12, 2011, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in Barnes v. Indiana which overturned the common law provision known as the ‘Castle Doctrine’. Justice David wrote the majority opinion. Of particular interest to every Hoosier is the unprecedented pronouncement by Justice David that "We [i.e. the Indiana Supreme Court] hold that there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers" into your homes. With this ruling, the ‘Castle Doctrine’ was rejected by Justice David and a majority of the court. The Castle Doctrine was a common law right enjoyed by subjects of the English Crown and citizens of the United States since colonial times and held that the right to defend your home from any unlawful entry by civil authority or private person was protected.
There was a large outcry on this May 2011 ruling from Hoosiers, state legislators, and the Indiana State Attorney General, so that on June 27, 2011, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller filed a legal brief, asking the Indiana Supreme Court to reconsider. The Indiana Supreme Court re-heard Barnes v. Indiana on September 20, 2011, and Justice David along with 3 other Justices reaffirmed the earlier ruling. Justice Robert Rucker was the lone justice to dissent both times the case was heard. (Justice Robert Rucker is also up for retention this November.)
Barr said, “There has been a fundamental shift on the Indiana Supreme Court bench. This decision has established a new legal precedent which is antithetical to hundreds of years of Western jurisprudence. This ruling is dangerous and affects each and every Hoosier. Hoosiers hold the key to the political fate of Justice Steven David. The key is on the general election retention vote of Justice Steven David.”
The Indianapolis Tea Party promotes education and encourages each citizen to understand the ruling and its’ implications before they cast a vote this November 6th. Hoosiers will ultimately decide whether Justice Steven David stays or goes.
Because judges make hundreds of decisions each year on a variety of difficult and controversial issues, sometimes a decision may cause a stir. Like some others, I took issue with parts of the Barnes decision written more than a year ago by Justice David. I raised those concerns in a friend‐of‐the‐court brief filed on behalf of a group of legislators. In response to that and other briefs, the Court issued an opinion that clarified the ruling, which help pave the way for the General Assembly to make modest changes to Indiana’s self‐defense statute after a great deal of discussion and debate. Whatever one’s opinion of the Barnes decision, that series of events demonstrates how each branch of government can appropriately exercise its role in resolving important issues.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 31, 2012 12:53 PM
Posted to Indiana Courts