INDIANAPOLIS â€" The Indiana Senate voted 45-5 Monday to protect Hoosiers’ rights against illegal entry â€" even if it’s a police officer at their door.
Senate Bill 1 now heads to the House for consideration. All area senators supported the measure.
In May, the Indiana Supreme Court found that citizens have no right under common law to reasonably resist police who unlawfully enter their homes. It was a 3-2 decision â€" one that critics argue runs counter to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure.
Legislators are trying to clarify the state’s “no retreat†law in response to heavy public criticism of the ruling.
The legislation permits a homeowner to use reasonable force in resisting a police officer’s unlawful entry into a dwelling if the homeowner does not realize the person entering is an officer or if the officer is not engaged in official duty.
The bill specifies that even in such a case, violent force should be used to prevent the unlawful entry only if there is no other adequate alternative.
In other cases, homeowners may not resist, such as when officers:
•Have been invited in by at least one resident, unless one or more other adult residents object.
•Are in hot pursuit.
•Are in pursuit of a criminal committing or escaping after committing a crime.
•Are in possession of a warrant.
House panel weighs oath requirement
The House Rules Committee on Monday considered legislation that would require those testifying on bills in committee hearings to take an oath and be subject to perjury charges.
“This is where the rubber hits the road â€" in committee,†said Rep. Sean Eberhart, R-Shelbyville. “We need to make a statement that we expect to hear the truth. We want facts.â€
A member of the panel noted that the U.S. Congress requires an oath.
But regular citizens can’t walk right off the street and testify the way they can at the Indiana Statehouse.
“It would have an absolutely chilling effect on the public,†said Julia Vaughn, head of Common Cause Indiana â€" a nonpartisan citizen lobbying group. “This could create a very intimidating environment for people to come to committee and certainly you don’t need less information, you need more.â€
Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, said with all the security at the building it’s already a bit intimidating to even get in the door of the Statehouse. He said to add an oath and threat of prosecution would just make it feel more closed.
“I don’t want to go anywhere near criminalizing political disputes,†he said.
The committee agreed to take out any mechanism for bringing perjury charges. The author is going to work on a possible amendment on other parts of the bill.
A vote on House Bill 1208 must be taken by Friday to move forward in the session.
Nepotism and conflict targeted
The Indiana Senate voted 39-11 to limit employees of a city, town or other governmental unit from serving on its legislative body.
Those already in those positions on Jan. 1, 2013, would be able to fulfill their term and then decide whether they want to remain an employee or elected representative.
The bill is targeted at firefighters, police officers or others who often serve on city and town councils.
The bill also bars nepotism in local government except for a few specific exceptions. These include a sheriff hiring a spouse as jail matron; a township trustee hiring a family member if the office is in a home and the coroner’s office.
Senate Bill 170 now heads to Indiana Senate. Sen. Sue Glick, R-LaGrange, opposed the bill while the other northeast Indiana senators supported the measure.
No comments:
Post a Comment