Rush Takes the Court on the Road Again as Questions About Her Record Persist

Honorably my ass...

INDIANAPOLIS — Chief Justice Loretta Rush has been unusually visible this fall, appearing at judicial conferences, recognizing judges for education and service and preparing to take the Indiana Supreme Court outside Indianapolis for another traveling oral argument.

To Hoosier Enquirer, her conduct raises a harder question about institutional priorities. Public ceremonies and her traveling court sessions may strengthen the judiciary’s public profile, but they do not themselves answer criticism of Rush’s longer record as chief justice. Brown County is a great fall vacation spot, with the leaves and all that time of year. She's that bad. Next will be French Lyck or Blue Chip Casino for the stay.

The Supreme Court Goes to Brown County

On Oct. 6, all eyes will turn to the Brown County Music Center in Nashville, where the Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments in Carla Miller v. Indiana Gas Company Inc. The case concerns a residential natural-gas explosion and what evidence can be considered in determining whether the gas was properly odorized. The argument begins at 10:30 a.m. Eastern, is expected to last 40 minutes and is open to the public. (Government of Indiana)

The Court says traveling arguments allow students, journalists and members of the public outside Indianapolis to watch the judicial process firsthand. Indiana’s Supreme Court has used traveling oral arguments for years, so the Brown County appearance is not something Rush invented for the current moment. The Court specifically describes the program as a way to demonstrate due process, judicial review and the independence of the judiciary. (Government of Indiana)

That is the Court’s explanation, and there is legitimate civic value in showing Hoosiers how appellate arguments actually work.

But an outreach program should not be confused with an evaluation of how well the institution itself is functioning.

Awards, Certificates and Another Public Event

The Brown County appearance follows another prominent Rush event.

At the annual judicial education conference, Rush recognized judges, magistrates and referees for continuing education and years of service. Thirty-two judicial officers received Indiana Judicial College certificates, requiring 120 hours of educational programming through the Indiana Office of Court Services, while nine judicial officers received long-service recognition. (Indiana Government)

There is nothing inherently objectionable about recognizing judges who devote substantial time to continuing education. Courts should want judicial officers to keep learning, particularly as criminal law, technology, evidence rules and civil procedure change.

Yet the ceremony also illustrates something Rush’s judiciary does very well: public presentation.

Press releases announce awards. Courts visit schools. Oral arguments travel around Indiana. Judges appear before civic organizations. The judicial branch maintains an extensive public-information operation explaining its programs and accomplishments. Its own news page shows a steady stream of announcements covering judicial education, public events, disciplinary charges, rule changes and judicial-selection proceedings. (Government of Indiana)

Rush has also been appearing on podcasts, clearly trying desperately on click seeking Internet sites to improve her dismal image.

See https://www.instagram.com/reels/Dd18AK1PYCM/

The Difference Between Outreach and Accountability

HE has repeatedly argued that the more important measure of a chief justice is not how many ceremonies she attends or how many public programs the Court sponsors. It is how the judiciary handles its core responsibilities: fair proceedings, consistent rules, judicial and attorney discipline, transparency and willingness to correct mistakes.

That is where HE’s criticism of Rush lies. Oh, and with her lies, officials lies in her orders.

Calling the traveling arguments or awards ceremonies a “dog and pony show” would be an editorial characterization, not an established fact. There is no evidence that the Brown County argument or judicial conference was scheduled specifically to distract from criticism of Rush.

But the broader contrast is fair to examine.

A judiciary can conduct excellent civic outreach and still face legitimate questions about its internal performance. Public confidence is not created only by putting judges in front of audiences. It also depends on how the institution reacts when litigants, lawyers or citizens question whether its procedures have worked fairly.

Brown County Will See the Court — But What Will It See?

The Oct. 6 argument will give hundreds of Hoosiers an unusual opportunity to watch the state’s highest court question lawyers in a real case. That is worthwhile.

It will also place Rush once again in a highly visible public setting as the Court emphasizes openness, due process and judicial independence.

Those are admirable principles.

The tougher test is whether the same principles are applied when scrutiny turns inward.

That is the central issue HE believes deserves attention as Rush continues her public schedule: Indiana does not need fewer public appearances from its Supreme Court. It needs those appearances accompanied by the same degree of openness when questions concern the Court’s own record.

Traveling to Brown County in the fall sure can show Hoosiers what the Supreme Court does for 40 minutes. Another nothing burger for sure! Enjoy the fall colors and how many nights at a hotel, or Airbnb.

She could stay at G. Michael Witte lake house, the one he, or his wife, "purchased" from a lawyer his Attorney Disciplinary Commission investigated there in Brown County, Indiana.

The larger question is what the Court does when the cameras are gone. And when is going ot act sua sponte to correct some of Rush's many errors.