IBJNews

Right-to-work boycott fines put on hold by Indiana high court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state Supreme Court placed on hold Wednesday all legislative fines against Democrats who boycotted the Indiana House during the right-to-work battle until it rules on whether it's legal for those fines to be deducted from their paychecks.

The court directed in an order signed by Chief Justice Randall Shepard that none of the $1,000-a-day fines levied this year against boycotting Democrats can be collected and none of the fines deducted for last year's five-week boycott can be returned to Democrats despite an order from a Marion County judge.

Majority House Republicans fined most House Democrats $4,000 for their January boycotts that left the House with too few members on several days as they tried to slow action the right-to-work bill that gained final legislative approval last week.

Mark GiaQuinta, a lawyer for the House Democrats, said he was pleased the Supreme Court had decided to take on the case and deny a request by the state attorney general's office to immediately allow deduction of this year's fines to begin.

"The court agreed with us that the denial of this method of collection until the appeal is heard in full does not constitute an emergency," GiaQuinta said.

State Attorney General Greg Zoeller, a Republican, has maintained that handling of the fines isn't a matter for the courts.

"Under the constitutional separation of powers the legislative branch is where the dispute over legislative fines ultimately should be decided, but to redirect it there requires this necessary first step at the Indiana Supreme Court," Zoeller said.

The Supreme Court didn't immediately set any deadlines for legal filings or schedule any hearings in the case.

Last week, Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels signed the right-to-work legislation, making Indiana the 23rd state to ban contracts between companies and labor unions that require all covered workers to pay fees.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Whaitaminit!
    Neither side should be ordering champagne just yet. The court has several choices: 1) agree that the fines are proper, but the collection method isn't (the original decision by the Marion Circuit court); The Legislature has the right and power to set its own rules, so quit whining, Dems; or something else. It's entirely possible that Justice Shepard and Friends could come up with something neither side would like - or that's even worse than a $1000/day fine... say, for example, that being a no-show for more than five continuous days constitutes a voluntary vacating of office, and a new Representative needs to be appointed or elected to fill the vacancy; meanwhile, the vacant seat(s) mean there are fewer Representatives needed to make a quorum! So, reserve judgement until Mr. Shepard rules.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. A couple of issues need some clarification especially since my name was on the list. I am not sure how this information was obtained and from where. For me, the amount was incorrect to begin with and the money does not come to me personally. I am guessing that the names listed are the Principal Investigators (individual responsible for the conduct of the trail) for the different pharmaceutical trials and not the entity which receives the checks. In my case, I participate in Phase II and Phase III trials which are required for new drug development. Your article should differentiate the amount of money received for consulting, for speaking fees, and for conduct of a clinical trial for new drug development. The lumping of all of these categories may give the reader a false impression of physicians just trying to get rich. The Sunshine Law may help to differentiate these categories in the future. The public should be aware that the Clinical Trial Industry could be a real economic driver for Indiana since these revenues supports jobs and new job creation. Nationally, this account for 10-20 billion which our State is missing out on to a large degree. Yes, new drug and technology development has gotten most of the attention (e.g. CTSI, BioCrossroads, etc.) However, serious money is being left on the table by not participating in the clinical trials to get those new drugs and medical devices on the market!!!! I guess that this is not sexy enough for academia.

  2. The address given for the Goldfish Swim Club is the Ace Hardware, is it closing?

  3. Out of state management and ownership. If Kite controlled it, everything would be leased. Of course, due to the roundabout, there is limited access to the south side of 116th now also. Just have to go down to the light.

  4. Hey smudge, You're opposed to arresting people for minor crimes? Sounds great! We should only focus on murders and such, right? Let's stand around and wait until someone shoots someone before we act. Whatever we do, we should never question anyone, frisk anyone, or arrest anyone unless they are actively engaged in shooting or stabbing. Very sound!

  5. You guys are being really rude to gays in the comments. (Not all of you, I presume). You need to stop it. Gays have just as much of a right to marry as straight people do. It's not fair how you guys are denying them equal rights. They're acting more human than you'll ever be. We obviously haven't matured since the bible was last updated. Hate the sin, not the sinner. You've all committed a sin at least once in your life. You've lied, you've stolen, etc. (Those are just possibilities). We should have a planet for people that support gay rights and a planet for people that don't. Then, gay people could get married without you bigots interfering with their love life. How would you feel if straights couldn't get married? How would you feel if teenagers were afraid to come out to their parents as straight? If straight people got hate everywhere they went? If straight people were afraid to go out in public, because they feared being judged? It's never going to happen at the rate society is going. You haven't seen the side of me where I act obscene. You're glad my inner demon hasn't been released. I would, but oh no, my comment would be removed because of my very strong emotions about this subject. I love gays, and love how they show their affection for each other. I just ADORE how a state is going to give same-sex couples a marriage license, then changes their mind. (I was obviously being sarcastic there). I just LOVE how society thinks gays are an abomination to our society. You're caring about marriage between two men or two women. That's a small thing. Just grow up, and let them marry. Let them live their lives. You can't make them change their sexuality. You can't make them change their lifestyle. In my opinion, gays are more than welcome to marry. Please, grow up and realize that people should be allowed to marry, even if it's same-sex marriage. You guys are saying that "the bible said gay marriage is wrong." Well, guess what else is wrong? Read Matthew:7 and you'll find out. (I am in no way breaking that. I am saying a fact). I'm stating that gays have just as much of a right to marry as straights do. (:

ADVERTISEMENT