Indiana public camping ban moves to House floor
Supporters frame as compassionate approach, while opponents say lack of resources could lead to jail time and fines.
To refine your search through our archives use our Advanced Search
Supporters frame as compassionate approach, while opponents say lack of resources could lead to jail time and fines.
The recall is tied to a January 2024 Clean Air Act settlement agreement between Cummins, the Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board.
A rule finalized by the EPA last week revoked a 2009 government declaration known as the endangerment finding that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare.
Lorth Sim’s death marks the seventh this year and the first of an ICE detainee at Miami Correctional Facility.
Despite its strict restrictions for personal use, the newly amended version of Senate Bill 250 makes certain business-focused exceptions.
Indiana Court of Appeals
James Irwin Richter v. Neha Bhatnagar Richter
No. 25A-DC-1593
Civil. Appeal from the Hamilton Superior Court, Special Judge Stephenie K. Gookins. Affirms the trial court’s order awarding Mother sole legal custody of the parties’ child, modifying Father’s child support obligation and authorizing the issuance of a passport for the child. Holds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in modifying legal custody from joint to sole where the record showed ongoing conflict, unilateral decision-making by Father and an inability to effectively co-parent, constituting a substantial and continuing change in circumstances rendering joint legal custody no longer in the child’s best interests. Further holds the trial court did not err in calculating Father’s weekly gross income for child support purposes based on his tax returns reflecting total annual income. Concludes the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering that the child obtain a passport in light of his advancement to high school and opportunities for international immersion trips, finding a substantial change in circumstances and implementing safeguards through the parenting coordinator to address Father’s concerns. Appellant’s attorneys: Bryan L. Ciyou; Anne M. Lowe. Appellee’s attorney: Dyllan M. Kemp.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
The groups behind the lawsuit said a federal campaign to review materials has escalated, leading to the removal of exhibits that discuss the history of slavery and enslaved people, civil rights, treatment of Indigenous peoples and climate science.
An Indiana bill that compels greater cooperation between local governments and federal immigration authorities could affect the state’s K-12 schools.
Supreme Court justices are required to recuse themselves from cases in which they own stock in a party in the case.
The lawsuit, filed in a Marion County court earlier this month, alleges the law firm lost out on millions of dollars of revenue after nearly half of its attorneys left.
Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of: A.B. and B.B. (Minor Children), E.B. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services
No. 25A-JC-1315
Civil. Appeal from the Brown Circuit Court, Judge Mary Wertz. Affirms the adjudication of A.B. and B.B. as children in need of services. Holds that even if the trial court erred in denying Mother’s emergency motion to continue the fact-finding hearing based on one of her attorneys’ hospitalizations, Mother failed to establish prejudice warranting reversal, particularly where she was represented by two attorneys and did not show how the denial affected her ability to secure expert testimony or prepare her defense. Further holds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the results of Stepfather’s unstipulated polygraph examination, reiterating that polygraph evidence is generally inadmissible absent a valid stipulation and rejecting Mother’s argument for a civil-case exception. Concludes that Mother did not demonstrate reversible error in either the denial of the continuance or the exclusion of the polygraph evidence. Appellant’s attorneys: Bryan L. Ciyou; Anne M. Lowe. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
Indiana’s five supreme court justices reported involvement and interests ranging from stock holdings in Eli Lilly and Co. to gifted Indiana Pacers tickets and merchandise.
The Salvadoran national’s case has become a focal point in the immigration debate after he was mistakenly deported to his home country last year.
Shein may be required to alter its actions or pay a hefty fine if a so-called non-compliance decision is reached following an in-depth investigation, the European Commission said.
One bill moving through the Indiana Statehouse would require foreign agents that receive funding or are owned by adversary nations, including Russia and China, to register with the attorney general.
Sen. Liz Brown, the Republican who authored Senate Bill 76, on Monday signed off on significant changes the House made to the bill.
Voters will be asked if the Indiana Constitution should be amended to allow a person charged with an offense other than murder or treason to be denied pretrial release under certain conditions.
The proposal for fewer early voting days was added Monday by the Senate Elections Committee through an amendment; no public testimony was allowed.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Eric D. Wilson v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-1542
Criminal. Appeal from the Morgan Superior Court, Judge Brian H. Williams. Reverses Wilson’s conviction of Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Holds that Deputy Caleb Merriman lacked reasonable suspicion to initiate the investigatory traffic stop where Wilson was observed making “jerky” and fidgeting body movements but committed no traffic violations and exhibited no erratic or unusual driving behavior. Concludes that, under the totality of the circumstances, the deputy’s observations amounted to a hunch rather than specific, articulable facts of criminal activity and therefore violated the Fourth Amendment. Further holds the stop was unreasonable under Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution after balancing the Litchfield factors, noting the moderate intrusion of field sobriety tests, transport to a hospital and a blood draw, and the absence of law enforcement need supported by traffic violations or abnormal driving. Determines the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence obtained as a result of the stop. Attorney for appellant: Glen E. Koch II. Attorney for the appellee: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.
This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.
Substantial revisions are expected to the bill, which could cost the state millions.