Indiana

In October, the Indiana Supreme Court published the Family Law Taskforce's final recommendations on how to make courts more efficient, less expensive, and easier to navigate in family law matters, with an emphasis in problem-solving, triage, training and stakeholder partnerships, and technology.

Earlier this year, the National Center for State Courts published a set of recommendations for the redesign of the Marion Superior Court in Indianapolis, Indiana. Many of the suggestions stem from the Family Justice Initiative—supported by IAALS and the NCSC—and its Principles for Family Justice Reform.

In late September, the Indiana Supreme Court announced the creation of the Indiana Innovation Initiative. One of the initiative’s two subgroups, the Family Law Taskforce, will consider the Family Justice Initiative Principles supported by IAALS in order to improve the way Indiana’s courts handle domestic relations cases.

The Supreme Court of India recently struck down a new law that sought to increase the executive branch’s power over the selection of judges. The Court ruled the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act unconstitutional, commenting that “once the constitutional structure is shaken, democracy collapses.”

It comes as no surprise to those who work in or with the courts that many litigants these days proceed through the civil and family court system without an attorney. The figures collected and released in Indiana’s recent State of the Judiciary show that over half of all civil and family law litigants in 2013 were self-represented. And such high rates are not unique to Indiana.

Indiana's superior courts are created by statute, and as such, the method of selecting judges is determined by statute as well and varies from county to county. In two counties, superior court judges are chosen through a commission-based appointment process, while in all other counties these judges are chosen in partisan or nonpartisan elections. Both of these selection processes are currently the subject of controversy.

The ACLU of Indiana filed a constitutional challenge to the process for electing superior court judges in Marion County. Under a system that may be unique, voters in each of the major party primaries cast ballots for half of the judicial seats to be filled. This ensures partisan balance on the bench, but it also makes the general election a mere formality.

Justice Stephen David has opted to actively campaign for his retention, in response to a Tea Party-based challenge based on his vote in a 2011 case. According to David's campaign website, judges "don't have the luxury of taking a poll to find out which way they should rule on thorny issues" but must rule based on the facts and the law.

Critics of Justice Stephen David’s majority opinion in a 2011 Fourth Amendment case are challenging his bid for retention. The decision rejected the “Your home is your castle” doctrine as a defense to violent acts against law enforcement personnel. Justice Robert Rucker is also standing for retention, but he dissented in the case.

From three finalists named by the judicial nominating commission, Governor Daniels appointed county court judge Loretta Rush to the supreme court. This appointment leaves only two states (Idaho and Iowa) without a woman on the highest court.